Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Anthropic · US | Google · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 for 5x the context window of haiku 4.5 (1m vs 200k tokens) and double the max output (128k vs 64k) or first haiku-class model with an adjustable 'effort' setting to trade off cost, latency, and intelligence. Pick Gemini 3.1 Pro for full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1m-token window or long video and document analysis. On a tight budget at scale, Claude Haiku 5.5 is the value pick.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Anthropic) and Gemini 3.1 Pro (Google) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Haiku 5.5 is anthropic's October 7, 2026 small-model refresh — a 1M-token context window (up from 200K) at roughly 75% lower average cost than Haiku 4.5, priced at $0.10/$0.50 per million tokens. Gemini 3.1 Pro is a 1M-token multimodal workhorse — huge breadth across text, image, audio and video, but recall fades deep in the window. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Claude Haiku 5.5 is about 20× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens vs $2/$12 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
- ▸Context window: 1M tokens vs 1M — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
- ▸Recency: Claude Haiku 5.5 is the newer model by about 8 months (released October 7, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Gemini 3.1 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic (US) | Google (US) |
| Released | October 7, 2026 | February 19, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) | 1M (~1,573 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens | $2/$12 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | No — API only |
| Modalities | text, image, code | text, image, audio, video, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | 26.3% |
Who wins what
5x the context window of Haiku 4.5 (1M vs 200K tokens) and double the max output (128K vs 64K)
Claude Haiku 5.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro is comparatively weak here — long-context recall drops sharply past 256K (26.3% on MRCR v2 at 1M)
First Haiku-class model with an adjustable 'effort' setting to trade off cost, latency, and intelligence
Claude Haiku 5.5
At $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens it undercuts Gemini 3.1 Pro ($2/$12 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Anthropic's cheapest small model yet — runs about 75% cheaper on average than Haiku 4.5
Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic's October 7, 2026 small-model refresh — a 1M-token context window (up from 200K) at roughly 75% lower average cost than Haiku 4.5, priced at $0.10/$0.50 per million tokens — and it runs cheaper at $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens.
Full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1M-token window
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Claude Haiku 5.5 is comparatively weak here — pricing jumps roughly 5x beyond 100K-token prompts ($0.50/$2.50 per million vs the headline $0.10/$0.50)
Long video and document analysis
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro lists long video and document analysis among its strengths; Claude Haiku 5.5 does not.
Agentic reasoning (high ARC-AGI-2)
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Claude Haiku 5.5 is comparatively weak here — as the smallest tier, trails both Sonnet 5.5 and Opus 5.5 on hard reasoning and open-ended work
Lowest cost at scale
Claude Haiku 5.5
At $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Claude Haiku 5.5
At $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens it undercuts Gemini 3.1 Pro, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Gemini 3.1 Pro
Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is 5x the context window of haiku 4.5 (1m vs 200k tokens) and double the max output (128k vs 64k)
→ Claude Haiku 5.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1m-token window
→ Gemini 3.1 Pro
That is its strongest area.
Claude Haiku 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's October 7, 2026 small-model refresh — a 1M-token context window (up from 200K) at roughly 75% lower average cost than Haiku 4.5, priced at $0.10/$0.50 per million tokens. Released October 7, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for 5x the context window of Haiku 4.5 (1M vs 200K tokens) and double the max output (128K vs 64K), first Haiku-class model with an adjustable 'effort' setting to trade off cost, latency, and intelligence, anthropic's cheapest small model yet — runs about 75% cheaper on average than Haiku 4.5, and over-refuses benign requests only 0.17% of the time on the API, down from Haiku 4.5's 0.44%.
Its trade-offs are real: pricing jumps roughly 5x beyond 100K-token prompts ($0.50/$2.50 per million vs the headline $0.10/$0.50), extended thinking can no longer be fully disabled — only dialed between low, medium, and high effort, and as the smallest tier, trails both Sonnet 5.5 and Opus 5.5 on hard reasoning and open-ended work. At $0.1 in / $0.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Gemini 3.1 Pro: where it fits
A 1M-token multimodal workhorse — huge breadth across text, image, audio and video, but recall fades deep in the window. Released February 19, 2026 by Google, it is built for full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1M-token window, long video and document analysis, agentic reasoning (high ARC-AGI-2), and broad multimodal understanding across formats.
Its trade-offs: long-context recall drops sharply past 256K (26.3% on MRCR v2 at 1M), premium price per token at $2/$12, and superseded within Google's own line by the newer 3.5/3.6 Flash releases for cost-sensitive work. At $2 in / $12 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less per token; Gemini 3.1 Pro holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Haiku 5.5 for 5x the context window of haiku 4.5 (1m vs 200k tokens) and double the max output (128k vs 64k), Gemini 3.1 Pro for full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1m-token window. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Haiku 5.5 leans toward 5x the context window of haiku 4.5 (1m vs 200k tokens) and double the max output (128k vs 64k) while Gemini 3.1 Pro leans toward full multimodal input — text, image, audio and video in one 1m-token window, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper — $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens vs $2/$12 per 1M tokens, roughly 20× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 1M tokens vs 1M is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Haiku 5.5, Gemini 3.1 Pro and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?
Claude Haiku 5.5 — released October 7, 2026, about 8 months after Gemini 3.1 Pro.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.