Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Grok Code Fast 1
Anthropic · US | xAI · 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 Grok Code Fast 1 for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 or low-latency code generation and terminal tasks. On a tight budget at scale, Claude Haiku 5.5 is the value pick.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Anthropic) and Grok Code Fast 1 (xAI) 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. Grok Code Fast 1 is xAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. 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 2× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens vs $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
- ▸Context window: Claude Haiku 5.5 holds 3.9× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 256K (~384 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
- ▸Recency: Claude Haiku 5.5 is the newer model by about 14 months (released October 7, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Grok Code Fast 1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic (US) | xAI (US) |
| Released | October 7, 2026 | August 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) | 256K (~384 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens | $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | No — API only |
| Modalities | text, image, code | text, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not 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 3.9× more than Grok Code Fast 1's 256K 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 Grok Code Fast 1 ($0.2/$1.5 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
Grok Code Fast 1 is comparatively weak here — a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner
Fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 among its strengths; Claude Haiku 5.5 does not.
Low-latency code generation and terminal tasks
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists low-latency code generation and terminal tasks among its strengths; Claude Haiku 5.5 does not.
High-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality 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 3.9× larger than Grok Code Fast 1's 256K, 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 Grok Code Fast 1, 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 fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50
→ Grok Code Fast 1
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.
Grok Code Fast 1: where it fits
XAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Released August 28, 2025 by xAI, it is built for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, low-latency code generation and terminal tasks, high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality, and a 256K window sized for real codebases.
Its trade-offs: text and code only — no image, audio or video input, xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score, a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner, and narrow focus — built for code, not general knowledge work. At $0.2 in / $1.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Haiku 5.5 and Grok Code Fast 1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less per token; Claude Haiku 5.5 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), Grok Code Fast 1 for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Grok Code Fast 1 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 Grok Code Fast 1 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 Grok Code Fast 1 leans toward fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Grok Code Fast 1?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper — $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens vs $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens, roughly 2× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Haiku 5.5 — 1M tokens vs 256K, about 3.9× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Grok Code Fast 1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Haiku 5.5, Grok Code Fast 1 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 Grok Code Fast 1?
Claude Haiku 5.5 — released October 7, 2026, about 14 months after Grok Code Fast 1.
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.