Which model is better: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 80.0% cheaper for input tokens ($0.80 vs. $4.00 per 1M tokens) and $4.00 vs. $20.00 for output tokens (5.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Claude 3.5 Haiku delivers lower response latency at 190ms TTFT (490ms faster than Claude Opus 5.5) with 130 vs. 95 tok/s throughput. Claude Opus 5.5 leads coding evaluations at 89.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 40.6% for Claude 3.5 Haiku and 93.2% 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 Opus 5.5
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$0.80
$4.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 5.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$20.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku (80.0% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.080
$0.200
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 2.5x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$1.00
$5.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 5.0x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (8k out)
1,024k (128k out)
Claude Opus 5.5 (5.0x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
190ms
680ms
Claude 3.5 Haiku (490ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
130 tok/s
95 tok/s
Claude 3.5 Haiku (+35 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
40.6%
89.9%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+49.3% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
41.6%
93.2%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+51.6% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
71%
92.1%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+21.1% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
69.4%
98%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+28.6% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
52.4 / 100
57.8 / 100
Claude Opus 5.5 (+5.4 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
Which is cheaper: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude 3.5 Haiku is cheaper at $0.80/1M input tokens ($4.00/1M output) compared to $4.00/1M input ($20.00/1M output) for Claude Opus 5.5.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 3.5 Haiku or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude 3.5 Haiku delivers faster first-token latency at 190ms TTFT (130 tok/s throughput) compared to 680ms TTFT (95 tok/s) for Claude Opus 5.5.
How do Claude 3.5 Haiku and Claude Opus 5.5 compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 40.6% versus 89.9% for Claude Opus 5.5. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 41.6% versus 93.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 (and 69.4% vs 98% 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 Opus 5.5?
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
