Which model is better: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 73.3% cheaper for input tokens ($0.80 vs. $3.00 per 1M tokens) and $4.00 vs. $15.00 for output tokens (3.8x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Claude 3.5 Haiku delivers lower response latency at 190ms TTFT (120ms faster than Claude 3.5 Sonnet) with 130 vs. 80 tok/s throughput. Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads coding evaluations at 49.0% SWE-bench Verified vs. 40.6% for Claude 3.5 Haiku and 59.4% vs. 41.6% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$0.80
$3.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 3.8x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$15.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku (73.3% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.080
$0.300
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 3.8x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$1.00
$3.75
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 3.8x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (8k out)
205k (8k out)
Equal Context Window
Avg TTFT Response Latency
190ms
310ms
Claude 3.5 Haiku (120ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
130 tok/s
80 tok/s
Claude 3.5 Haiku (+50 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
40.6%
49%
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (+8.4% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
41.6%
59.4%
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (+17.8% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
71%
78%
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (+7.0% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
69.4%
78.3%
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (+8.9% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
52.4 / 100
46.2 / 100
Claude 3.5 Haiku (+6.2 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Which is cheaper: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
Claude 3.5 Haiku is cheaper at $0.80/1M input tokens ($4.00/1M output) compared to $3.00/1M input ($15.00/1M output) for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
Claude 3.5 Haiku delivers faster first-token latency at 190ms TTFT (130 tok/s throughput) compared to 310ms TTFT (80 tok/s) for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
How do Claude 3.5 Haiku and Claude 3.5 Sonnet compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 40.6% versus 49% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 41.6% versus 59.4% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet (and 69.4% vs 78.3% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude 3.5 Haiku?
Choose Claude 3.5 Haiku (Anthropic) for rapid customer-facing chat, sub-agent routing, and real-time code autocomplete — offering a 204k context window, 190ms TTFT, and $0.80/1M input pricing ($0.080/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet?
Choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet (Anthropic) for legacy enterprise workflows, code review pipelines, and human-like content generation — offering a 204k context window, 310ms TTFT, and $3.00/1M input pricing ($0.300/1M cached reads).
