Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.8

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Claude Haiku 4.5 costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 40 shared benchmarks.

Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic

39.5

Rank #165 Confirmed

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 40 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher in 0 categories and Claude Opus 4.8 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 64.7 to 15.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 14.3% for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 91.1% for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Claude Haiku 4.5 is cheaper at $1 / $5 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
ProviderAnthropicAnthropic
Noometry Index39.560.7
Released2025-10-152026-05-28
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output64K128K
Input $ / M tokens$1$5
Output $ / M tokens$5$25
Results tracked5365

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 44.0 (#78), Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena WebDev13301556
SciCode43.3%53.5%
WeirdML45.4%82.9%
LMArena Coding14531490
ALE-Bench653.481,564
DeepSWE—59%
FrontierCode—46.5%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)66.6%—
SWE-bench Multilingual64.7%—
GSO—47.1%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 33.6 (#52), Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
DeepResearch Bench45.5%50.2%
Vending-Bench 2458.895,787
Terminal-Bench35.5%—
APEX-Agents—48.9%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard68.7%—
OSWorld 2.0—20.6%
Remote Labor Index—8.3%
τ²-bench Banking—39.7%
PostTrainBench—33.8%
BALROG31.2%—
ExploitBench13.7%—
GBAEval—70.9%
GDP.pdf—24%
LMArena Search—1204

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 15.1 (#320), Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
ARC-AGI-24%72.1%
NYT Connections (extended)14.3%91.1%
ARC-AGI-147.7%92.5%
CritPt0%20.9%
Chess Puzzles8%34%
LMArena Hard Prompts14201482
DTBench73.6%94.9%
LMCA30.9%57.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index142.41158.21
ForecastBench61.459.9
SimpleBench—64.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—88.8%
EnigmaEval—23.5%
EBR-Bench—28.6%
Mystery Game Puzzles—36%
Surface Evolver Bench—87.5%
Bench to the Future 3—0.14

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 44.9 (#78), Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202566.7%98.3%
LMArena Math13961487
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.9%47.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%31.3%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—80%
FrontierMath Tier 4—56.1%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—91.8%
ProofBench—69%
Omni-MATH56.1%—
MATH Level 596.4%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 37.7 (#153), Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
GPQA Diamond71.2%91%
SimpleQA Verified13.2%53%
LMArena Expert14421502
MMLU-Pro77.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.8%—
GPQA (HELM)60.5%—

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 26.8 (#118), Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
Blueprint-Bench 20%14.5%
LMArena Document14201475
LMArena Vision—1294
Furniture Assembly—42.5%

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 49.9 (#129), Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Non-English13771450
LMArena Chinese14171507
LMArena French14081481
LMArena German13751472
LMArena Japanese13391440
LMArena Korean13471432
LMArena Russian13811474
LMArena Spanish14201466

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 71.4 (#149), Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Instruction Following14141476
IFEval80.1%—

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 43.6 (#92), Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Longer Query14271483

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Haiku 4.5: 57.9 (#123), Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16)

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text13961461
LMArena Creative Writing13721454
EQ-Bench 410641281
LMArena Multi-Turn14091476
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1840
WildBench83.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Haiku 4.5 better than Claude Opus 4.8?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Claude Haiku 4.5 costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.8?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is cheaper. It lists at $1 per million input tokens and $5 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.8 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 44.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Haiku 4.5 and Claude Opus 4.8 share?

40 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Haiku 4.5 has 53 scored results on Noometry and Claude Opus 4.8 has 65.

Related comparisons

Go deeper