Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B

Anthropic · US  |  Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) · China · 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 Nanbeige4.3-33B for 33b dense open-weight model under apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context or artificial analysis intelligence index of 20, first of the 8 models in its comparison class. Choose Nanbeige4.3-33B if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Haiku 5.5 if you want a managed API.

Claude Haiku 5.5 (Anthropic, US) and Nanbeige4.3-33B (Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin), China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. 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. Nanbeige4.3-33B is nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecClaude Haiku 5.5Nanbeige4.3-33B
ProviderAnthropic (US) Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) (China)
ReleasedOctober 7, 2026 October 25, 2026
Context window1M tokens (~1,500 pages) 512K tokens (~786 pages)
Price (in/out)$0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?No — API only Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, image, code text, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
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 1.9× more than Nanbeige4.3-33B's 512K tokens in a single prompt.

First Haiku-class model with an adjustable 'effort' setting to trade off cost, latency, and intelligence

Claude Haiku 5.5

Nanbeige4.3-33B is comparatively weak here — coding benchmarks are self-reported, with non-standard settings noted on the model card and no independent reproduction

Anthropic's cheapest small model yet — runs about 75% cheaper on average than Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 5.5

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 — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.

33B dense open-weight model under Apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context

Nanbeige4.3-33B

Open weights make this possible at all — Claude Haiku 5.5 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 20, first of the 8 models in its comparison class

Nanbeige4.3-33B

Nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware — and its weights are open while Claude Haiku 5.5 is API-only.

Lab-reported Terminal-Bench 2.1 of 80.9 and DeepSWE of 65.5

Nanbeige4.3-33B

Nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware — and it is the newer of the two.

Lowest cost at scale

Nanbeige4.3-33B

Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Claude Haiku 5.5's $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens.

Largest single-prompt input

Claude Haiku 5.5

Its 1M tokens window is about 1.9× larger than Nanbeige4.3-33B's 512K tokens, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

→ Nanbeige4.3-33B

At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Claude Haiku 5.5, 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.

A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs

→ Nanbeige4.3-33B

Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Haiku 5.5 is API-only.

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 33b dense open-weight model under apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context

→ Nanbeige4.3-33B

That is its strongest area.

An enterprise with regional data-residency rules

→ Claude Haiku 5.5 or Nanbeige4.3-33B

Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.

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.

Nanbeige4.3-33B: where it fits

Nanbeige LLM Lab's October 25, 2026 Apache 2.0 open model - 33B parameters and 512K context, aimed at agentic coding on modest hardware. Released October 25, 2026 by Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin), it is built for 33B dense open-weight model under Apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context, artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 20, first of the 8 models in its comparison class, and lab-reported Terminal-Bench 2.1 of 80.9 and DeepSWE of 65.5.

Its trade-offs: coding benchmarks are self-reported, with non-standard settings noted on the model card and no independent reproduction, no public first-party API or per-token price; Artificial Analysis lists no publicly available API, and text-only input. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

The bottom line for this matchup

The defining split here is open vs. closed. Nanbeige4.3-33B gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Haiku 5.5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.

Want both Claude Haiku 5.5 and Nanbeige4.3-33B 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 Nanbeige4.3-33B 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 Nanbeige4.3-33B leans toward 33b dense open-weight model under apache 2.0 with a 524,288-token context, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Nanbeige4.3-33B?

Nanbeige4.3-33B is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Haiku 5.5 is API-metered at $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 5.5 — 1M tokens vs 512K tokens, about 1.9× 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 Nanbeige4.3-33B together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Haiku 5.5, Nanbeige4.3-33B 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 Nanbeige4.3-33B?

Nanbeige4.3-33B — released October 25, 2026, about 18 days after Claude Haiku 5.5.

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.