Model comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Haiku 4.5 #77 (Estimated); Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share 4 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude Haiku 4.5; 20 to Gemini 2.5 Pro.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 4
- Claude Haiku 4.5 only
- 1
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 20
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Haiku 4.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Gemini 2.5 Pro has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 57.25 versus 56.58. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Gemini 2.5 Pro's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 11.6 against 4.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 63.8%. Claude Haiku 4.5 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.00 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Haiku 4.5. That is roughly 2.0x on output cost alone. Gemini 2.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Haiku 4.5.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Δ | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude Haiku 4.573.3 | Margin← 9.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8 |
| Math | Claude Haiku 4.54.9 | Margin→ 6.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6 |
| Knowledge | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.3%B 63.8%Winner: Claude Haiku 4.5Δ 9.5SWE-bench Verified: Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 73.3%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 63.8%. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 5.903%B 14.138%Winner: Gemini 2.5 ProΔ 8.2FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 5.903%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 14.138%. Gemini 2.5 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 2.083%B 4.167%Winner: Gemini 2.5 ProΔ 2.1FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 2.083%; Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 4.167%. Gemini 2.5 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5$1 input / $5 output | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 output | Claude Haiku 4.5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | Gemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | Gemini 2.5 Pro21.19 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5200K | Gemini 2.5 Pro1M | Gemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic6 benchmarks
CodingClaude Haiku 4.5 wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | — | 83% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 18.8% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 25.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 21.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -14.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 39.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 87.4% | Not comparable |
MathGemini 2.5 Pro wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 48.7% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 57.25 to 56.58. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.3% and 63.8%.
Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Claude Haiku 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.3 versus 63.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Gemini 2.5 Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 11.6 versus 4.9. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.