Claude 3.5 Haiku is 94.7% cheaper for input tokens ($0.80 vs. $15.00 per 1M tokens) and $4.00 vs. $60.00 for output tokens (18.8x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Claude 3.5 Haiku delivers lower response latency at 190ms TTFT (2410ms faster than o1) with 130 vs. 48 tok/s throughput. o1 leads coding evaluations at 48.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 40.6% for Claude 3.5 Haiku and 78.0% 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
o1
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$0.80
$15.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 18.8x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$60.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku (93.3% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.080
$7.500
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 93.8x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$1.00
$15.00
Claude 3.5 Haiku is 15.0x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (8k out)
205k (100k out)
Equal Context Window
Avg TTFT Response Latency
190ms
2600ms
Claude 3.5 Haiku (2410ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
130 tok/s
48 tok/s
Claude 3.5 Haiku (+82 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
40.6%
48.9%
o1 (+8.3% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
41.6%
78%
o1 (+36.4% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
71%
83.3%
o1 (+12.3% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
69.4%
96.4%
o1 (+27.0% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
52.4 / 100
37.2 / 100
Claude 3.5 Haiku (+15.2 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Claude 3.5 Haiku is cheaper at $0.80/1M input tokens ($4.00/1M output) compared to $15.00/1M input ($60.00/1M output) for o1.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 3.5 Haiku or o1?
Claude 3.5 Haiku delivers faster first-token latency at 190ms TTFT (130 tok/s throughput) compared to 2600ms TTFT (48 tok/s) for o1.
How do Claude 3.5 Haiku and o1 compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 40.6% versus 48.9% for o1. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.5 Haiku scores 41.6% versus 78% for o1 (and 69.4% vs 96.4% 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 o1?
Choose o1 (OpenAI) for legacy reasoning benchmarks, scientific literature review, and complex mathematical proofs — offering a 204k context window, 2600ms TTFT, and $15.00/1M input pricing ($7.500/1M cached reads).
