Skip to content
OpenKey

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemini 3 Flash Preview

AnthropicGoogleboth via one key, provider price + 3%

Both models target the same niche: fast, cheap models for high-volume agentic and coding work, not frontier reasoning. Claude Haiku 4.5 (Anthropic, released 2025-10-15) trades intelligence for speed at a fixed 200K context. Gemini 3 Flash Preview (Google, released 2025-12-17) is newer, cheaper per token, and ships with a 1,048,576-token context window plus audio and video input. The gap in price and context is large enough to matter for real workloads.

Spec vs spec

SpecClaude Haiku 4.5Gemini 3 Flash Preview
Context window200K1.0M
Max output64K66K
Input modalitiestext, image, filetext, image, file, audio, video
Output modalitiestexttext
ReleasedOct 15, 2025Dec 17, 2025
Reasoningoptionaloptional

Pricing

Per 1M tokens. Provider price plus the flat 3% fee — the sum is what you pay.

openkey.ai

anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5

Input · 1M tokens

$1.00 + 3%$1.03

Output · 1M tokens

$5.00 + 3%$5.15

Cache read · 1M tokens

$0.100 + 3%$0.103

Cache write · 1M tokens

$1.25 + 3%$1.29

FEE — FLAT, EVERY MODEL3%

openkey.ai

google/gemini-3-flash-preview

Input · 1M tokens

$0.500 + 3%$0.515

Output · 1M tokens

$3.00 + 3%$3.09

Cache read · 1M tokens

$0.050 + 3%$0.052

Cache write · 1M tokens

$0.083 + 3%$0.086

FEE — FLAT, EVERY MODEL3%

One workload, priced on both

10M input + 2M output tokens at each model's price, flat 3% fee included.

anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5

$20.60

$20.00 provider + 3%

google/gemini-3-flash-previewCheaper

$11.33

$11.00 provider + 3%

Benchmarks

Design Arena categories where both models have results. Higher Elo and lower rank win.

Claude Haiku 4.5Gemini 3 Flash Preview
CategoryEloRankEloRank
3D1149#631261#29
Code1164#631239#33
Game dev1162#601232#38
Websites1164#641239#33

Head-to-head preference voting. How we filter and rank

Pricing math on a real workload

A 10M input / 2M output token run costs $20.00 on Claude Haiku 4.5 and $11.00 on Gemini 3 Flash Preview — Gemini is the cheaper model here. On OpenKey (provider price x 1.03), Claude Haiku 4.5 lists at $1.03/M input and $5.15/M output (provider: $1.00/$5.00). Gemini 3 Flash Preview lists at $0.515/M input and $3.09/M output (provider: $0.50/$3.00). The input price ratio is 2.0x — Claude Haiku costs twice as much per input token. Both run through OpenKey with one key and the same flat 3% fee on top of provider list price.

Coding and agentic benchmarks

Gemini 3 Flash Preview has design_arena results across both the `agents` and `models` arenas — including fullstack (rank 17, 47.1% win rate), webapps (rank 17, 49.5%), and godotgamedev (rank 8, 52.3%) — plus strong `models`-arena scores in codecategories (rank 33, 57.6% win rate) and gamedev (rank 38, 58.3% win rate). Claude Haiku 4.5 only has `models`-arena data: codecategories rank 63 (44.8% win rate) and gamedev rank 60 (44.6% win rate) — both worse ranks and lower win rates than Gemini's equivalents. Anthropic's own artificial_analysis numbers put Claude Haiku 4.5 at a 43.9 coding index and 16.4 agentic index, but there's no matching artificial_analysis data for Gemini 3 Flash Preview to compare directly.

Context and long-document work

Gemini 3 Flash Preview's 1,048,576-token context dwarfs Claude Haiku 4.5's 200,000 — a context ratio of 0.19, meaning Haiku's window is under a fifth the size. If your workload involves ingesting large codebases, long transcripts, or multi-document RAG context in a single call, Haiku's 200K ceiling will force chunking sooner. Max output is close either way: 64,000 tokens for Haiku vs 65,535 for Gemini.

Modality differences

Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, image, and file input, output text only. Gemini 3 Flash Preview accepts text, image, file, audio, and video input, also outputting text only. If your product needs audio transcription-adjacent tasks or video-frame reasoning in the same call, Gemini is the only one of the two that takes that input at all.

When to pick each

Pick Gemini 3 Flash Preview by default for coding assistants, agentic tool-calling loops, and anything touching large context or non-text input — it's cheaper, wider-context, and scores better across the overlapping design_arena categories. Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 if you specifically need the `top_k` sampling parameter (Gemini's supported_parameters list doesn't include it) or you're locked into Anthropic's tokenizer and reasoning-block format for existing tooling.

Which model for which job

Use casePickWhy
High-volume agentic tool useGemini 3 Flash PreviewRanked in the `agents` arena with rank 8-24 across categories; Haiku has no agents-arena data at all
Large codebase / long-document contextGemini 3 Flash Preview1,048,576 token context vs Haiku's 200,000 — over 5x larger
Cost-sensitive high-volume text pipelineGemini 3 Flash Preview$11.00 vs $20.00 for a 10M-in/2M-out run
Audio or video input processingGemini 3 Flash PreviewOnly Gemini accepts audio and video input modalities
Existing Anthropic tool-calling stack needing top_kClaude Haiku 4.5top_k is in Haiku's supported_parameters list, not in Gemini's

Questions

Which model is cheaper for a typical 10M input / 2M output workload?
Gemini 3 Flash Preview, at $11.00 total on OpenKey pricing versus $20.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 — roughly 45% cheaper for that mixed workload.
How much bigger is Gemini's context window?
Gemini 3 Flash Preview supports 1,048,576 tokens of context versus Claude Haiku 4.5's 200,000 — a context ratio of 0.19, so Haiku's window is under a fifth the size of Gemini's.
Does Claude Haiku 4.5 win on any benchmark?
In the `models` arena, Haiku's asciiart score (rank 30, 49.3% win rate) is its best result, but Gemini isn't benchmarked on asciiart for direct comparison. Across the categories both models share — codecategories and gamedev — Gemini ranks higher in both (33 and 38 vs Haiku's 63 and 60).
Can both models process images?
Yes — both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemini 3 Flash Preview accept text, image, and file input. Gemini additionally accepts audio and video, which Haiku does not support.

Go deeper