Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning vs Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision: which model should you choose?
We compared Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning and Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision has the stronger average benchmark score; Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.
Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning
Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning is a multimodal model from Anthropic. It offers a 128,000-token context window, costs $15.11 per million input tokens and $70.05 per million output tokens, and averages 81.4 across the index's benchmark suite.
- Input
- $15.11 / 1M
- Output
- $70.05 / 1M
- Context
- 128,000
- Avg score
- 81.4
- Open weights
- No
Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision
Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision is a multimodal model from Google DeepMind. It offers a 200,000-token context window, costs $14.91 per million input tokens and $71.00 per million output tokens, and averages 82.0 across the index's benchmark suite.
- Input
- $14.91 / 1M
- Output
- $71.00 / 1M
- Context
- 200,000
- Avg score
- 82.0
- Open weights
- No
Specification comparison
| Spec | Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $15.11 | $14.91 | B |
| Output price / 1M | $70.05 | $71.00 | A |
| Context window | 128,000 | 200,000 | B |
| Max output | 128,000 | 4,096 | A |
| Average score | 81.4 | 82.0 | B |
| Arena Elo | 1444.2 | 1451.3 | B |
| Open weights | No | No | Tie |
Benchmark comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning wins 3, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision wins 9, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision | Gap | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 83.4 | 83.9 | 0.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| GPQA Diamond | 74.6 | 78.0 | 3.4 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| SWE-bench Verified | 69.6 | 72.4 | 2.8 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| HumanEval | 88.7 | 85.8 | 2.9 | Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning |
| MATH-500 | 85.8 | 82.9 | 2.9 | Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning |
| AIME 2025 | 79.0 | 80.0 | 1.0 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| LiveCodeBench | 73.8 | 76.0 | 2.2 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| IFEval | 89.9 | 90.2 | 0.3 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| TruthfulQA | 82.5 | 84.1 | 1.6 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| HellaSwag | 90.9 | 90.8 | 0.1 | Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning |
| MMMU | 76.7 | 78.2 | 1.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
| Arena Elo | 1444.2 | 1451.3 | 7.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision |
Price analysis
On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning costs about $28.84 per million tokens and Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision costs about $28.93. Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning is roughly 0% cheaper than Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.
Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision has the larger context window at 200,000 tokens, compared with 128,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.
Verdict
Across 12 shared benchmarks, Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning wins 3, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision wins 9, and 0 are tied. On the index average, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision leads Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning by 0.6 points (82.0 versus 81.4).
The price picture favours Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning. The context picture favours Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.
If you need a single default, start with Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision for quality-sensitive work and Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.
Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning if
- Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
- You need the larger 128,000-token output limit.
- The workload needs multi-step reasoning.
Choose Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision if
- You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
- You need the larger 200,000-token context window.
FAQ
Is Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning better than Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision?
On the index average, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision leads Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning by 0.6 points (82.0 versus 81.4). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning wins 3 benchmarks, Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision wins 9.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning or Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision?
Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $28.84 per million tokens, versus $28.93 for Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision.
Which has the larger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision has the larger context window at 200,000 tokens. Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning has 128,000 tokens.
Are these models open weights?
Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning is proprietary; Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision is proprietary.
Which should I choose for production?
If you need a single default, start with Gemini 2.5 Pro Vision for quality-sensitive work and Claude Haiku 4.5 Reasoning for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.