Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3 235B A22B (2507)

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.

Qwen3 235B A22B (2507): where it fits

An older 235B text-only open mixture-of-experts with broad knowledge and strong writing — but no vision, no thinking mode, and weak coding. Released July 21, 2025 by Alibaba, it is built for deep world knowledge from 235B total parameters (83.0 MMLU-Pro, 93.1 MMLU-Redux), exceptional multilingual and alignment results (79.2 Arena-Hard v2, 85.2 WritingBench), outstanding structured logic — 95.0 on ZebraLogic, and no thinking mode, which makes latency and token spend entirely predictable.

Its trade-offs: nearly a year old and superseded — Artificial Analysis now steers users to Qwen3.5-397B instead, text-only with no vision, and the absence of a thinking mode caps its hardest reasoning, coding is weak by 2026 standards, and it publishes no SWE-Bench score to compare on, and its 235B weights need roughly 438GB in BF16, far beyond consumer hardware. 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. Qwen3 235B A22B (2507) 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.

Related comparisons