Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Haiku 5.5 Verdict
- Claude Opus 5.5 (max) leads on quality: 72.0 vs 61.3.
- Claude Opus 5.5 (max) is stronger in coding, composite, knowledge, long context, maths, reasoning, agents & tools, multimodal.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (high) is 40× cheaper ($0.200 vs $8.00 per 1M blended).
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (high) streams 1.8× faster (174 vs 96 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Haiku 5.5 (high) | Claude Opus 5.5 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 61.3 | 72.0 |
| Coding score | 62.6 | 82.9 |
| Composite score | 72.4 | 84.7 |
| Knowledge score | 64.3 | 79.2 |
| Long context score | 63.8 | 67.6 |
| Maths score | 66.2 | 74.9 |
| Reasoning score | 72.1 | 76.0 |
| Agents & tools score | – | 69.0 |
| Multimodal score | – | 71.1 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.200 | $8.00 |
| Output speed | 174 tok/s | 96 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 22.6 s | 662.1 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 90.6% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 91.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 95.0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.2% | 100.0% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 72.2% |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 64.8% |
| SciCode | – | 66.9% |
| APEX-Agents | – | 73.5% |
| ProofBench | – | 100.0% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1587 | 1813 |
| LiveBench | – | 83.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 92.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 89.3% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 71.7% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 97.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 80.3% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 86.3% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 65.7% |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 37.8 | 57.6 |
| AA-LCR | 77.3% | 84.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 87.7% |
| AA-Omniscience | 5.8 | 46.4 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 37.3% | 61.4% |
| SciCode (AA) | 48.7% | 66.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | – | 97.5% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | – | 91.7% |
| CritPt | 18.6% | 31.7% |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | 45.9% | 68.3% |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | – | 38.2% |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | – | 56.3% |
| CUA-bench | – | 14.0% |
| EBR-bench | – | 71.4% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | – | 71.0% |
| MirrorCode | – | 77.4% |
| LMCA | – | 68.2% |
| DTBench | – | 98.9% |
| CursorBench | – | 57.8% |
| GDP.pdf | – | 30.6% |
| FrontierSWE | – | 62.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 21.7% | 59.6% |
| AutomationBench | 33.7% | 69.5% |
| GDP.pdf | 17.2% | 26.2% |
| MLCR | – | 66.7% |
| Harvey LAB | 1.1% | 4.2% |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 34.8% | 66.2% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 55.5% | 41.4% |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | 1442 | 1807 |
Data as of 2026-10-11. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5: questions
- Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Claude Opus 5.5?
- Claude Opus 5.5 (max) leads on quality: 72.0 vs 61.3. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 5.5 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-10-11, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Claude Opus 5.5 for coding?
- Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in coding (83 vs 63 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Claude Opus 5.5?
- Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper: $0.200 against $8.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Claude Opus 5.5?
- Claude Haiku 5.5 streams faster: 174 against 96 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.