Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct
Side-by-side API pricing and Artificial Analysis performance for Claude Haiku 4.5 (Anthropic) and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct (Alibaba (Qwen)). Green cells mark the better value in each row.
Prices updated Jul 22, 2026, 1:34 AM UTC · refreshed hourly
| Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic | Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen) | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.00 | $0.104 |
| Output $/1M | $5.00 | $0.416 |
| Blended $/1M (3:1) | $2.00 | $0.182 |
| RAG example (30K in / 2K out) | $0.04 | $0.003952 |
| Quality & speed | ||
| Intelligence Index | 29.6 | 11.1 |
| Coding Index | 43.9 | — |
| Agentic Index | 16.4 | — |
| Output speed (tok/s) | — | 72 |
| Time to first token | — | 1.09s |
| Specs | ||
| Context window | 200K | 131K |
| Input modalities | text, image, file | text, image |
FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct?
Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct has the lower blended API price at $0.182 per 1M tokens (3:1 input:output mix), versus $2.00 for the other model. Prices are live from OpenRouter and refresh about hourly.
Which is better for RAG workloads?
For a typical RAG request (30K input / 2K output tokens), Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct costs about $0.003952 per request versus $0.04. Also compare context windows: Claude Haiku 4.5 offers 200K and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct offers 131K.
Which scores higher on Artificial Analysis benchmarks?
Claude Haiku 4.5 leads on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (29.6 vs 11.1). Check coding and agentic indices on this page for workload-specific tradeoffs.