Model decision surface

Compare AI models

Start with Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.

First modelSecond model

Current public data

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Live dataset updated 9/3/2026, 3:06:08 AM UTC

Open 1200×630 evidence receipt

Factual comparison of Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
Field	Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic	Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct Qwen
ModelCap position	#45	#63
Index score	52.4	42.7
Evidence	Measured3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards	Measured3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards
Input / 1M	$1.00	$0.10
Output / 1M	$5.00	$1.10
Pricing status	fresh	fresh
Context	200K	262K
Providers	4	5
Weight access	API only	Open weights

Decision facts

Claude Haiku 4.5 is #45; Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct is #63 on the same current language board.
Index scores are 52.4 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 42.7 for Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct.
Both positions use Measured evidence.
Listed output price per 1M tokens is $5.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and $1.10 for Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct.
Published context is 200,000 tokens for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 262,144 for Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct.
Weight access differs: Claude Haiku 4.5 is none; Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct is open.
ModelCap currently lists 4 providers for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 5 for Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct.

These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.

Popular comparisons

Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.