Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5

Anthropic · US  |  Anthropic · US · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Both are Anthropic models. Claude Haiku 5.5 is the newer, generally stronger default; reach for Claude Sonnet 4.5 when a specific cost or latency profile matters more than the latest capabilities.

Claude Haiku 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 4.5 are both Anthropic models, so the real question is not which lab to trust but which tier fits your workload and budget. 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. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is september 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Since both come from the same lab, the comparison below focuses on the tier-and-cost trade-offs that actually separate them.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecClaude Haiku 5.5Claude Sonnet 4.5
ProviderAnthropic (US) Anthropic (US)
ReleasedOctober 7, 2026 September 29, 2025
Context window1M tokens (~1,500 pages) 200K (~300 pages)
Price (in/out)$0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens $3/$15 per 1M tokens
Open weight?No — API only No — API only
Modalitiestext, image, code text, image, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published 77.2%
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

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

Its 1M tokens window holds about 5× more than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K in a single prompt.

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 Claude Sonnet 4.5 ($3/$15 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

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is comparatively weak here — capped at 200K since Anthropic retired its 1M beta in April 2026, while its successors ship 1M as standard

Agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch among its strengths; Claude Haiku 5.5 does not.

Computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch)

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch) among its strengths; Claude Haiku 5.5 does not.

Long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks among its strengths; Claude Haiku 5.5 does not.

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.

Largest single-prompt input

Claude Haiku 5.5

Its 1M tokens window is about 5× larger than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.

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 Claude Sonnet 4.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

→ Claude Haiku 5.5

Larger 1M tokens 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 agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch

→ Claude Sonnet 4.5

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.

Claude Sonnet 4.5: where it fits

September 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Released September 29, 2025 by Anthropic, it is built for agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch), long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks, and tracking its own remaining token budget natively, which few models do.

Its trade-offs: superseded twice — Sonnet 4.6 and Sonnet 5 match or beat it at the same or lower price, capped at 200K since Anthropic retired its 1M beta in April 2026, while its successors ship 1M as standard, and missing the modern API surface: no adaptive thinking, no effort control, and half the max output of newer Sonnets. At $3 in / $15 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

Because Claude Haiku 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 4.5 come from the same lab (Anthropic), they share the same training philosophy and ecosystem — the decision is purely tier vs. cost. Claude Haiku 5.5 is the more capable, more recent option; the other earns its place only when its price or latency profile fits a specific job better. Most teams should default to Claude Haiku 5.5 and drop down only with a concrete reason.

Want both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 4.5 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 pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Haiku 5.5 or Claude Sonnet 4.5 better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Claude Haiku 5.5, 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 Claude Sonnet 4.5 leans toward agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Claude Sonnet 4.5?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper — $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens vs $3/$15 per 1M tokens, roughly 30× apart on input.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 5.5 — 1M tokens vs 200K, about 5× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Should I upgrade from Claude Sonnet 4.5 to Claude Haiku 5.5?

Since both are Anthropic models, the newer one (Claude Haiku 5.5) is usually the better default unless you need a specific cost or latency profile from the other.

Which is newer, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Claude Sonnet 4.5?

Claude Haiku 5.5 — released October 7, 2026, about 12 months after Claude Sonnet 4.5.

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.