# Claude Haiku 5.5 vs GPT-5.2

> GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 49.5 on the Noometry Index. Claude Haiku 5.5 costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-vs-gpt-5-2
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 9

## Summary

- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher in 1 category and GPT-5.2 in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.2 leads 50.2 to 35.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 65.7% for Claude Haiku 5.5 and 83.6% for GPT-5.2.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 400K.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 49.5 | 54.1 |
| Rank | 52 | 34 |
| Context | 1M | 400K |
| Input $/M | $0.10 | $1.75 |
| Output $/M | $0.50 | $14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Haiku 5.5: 49.2 (#50)
- GPT-5.2: 51.6 (#37)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1587 | 1416 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 73.8% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 66.7% |
| GSO | — | 27.4% |
| WeirdML | — | 72.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1447 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,294 |
| AlgoTune | — | 2.05 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Haiku 5.5: —
- GPT-5.2: 40.2 (#24)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 64.9% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 55.9% |
| GDPval | — | 49.7% |
| Remote Labor Index | — | 2.5% |
| τ²-bench Airline | — | 83% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 32.2% |
| τ²-bench Retail | — | 81.6% |
| τ²-bench Telecom | — | 89.7% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 41.1% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1207 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 75.3% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,591 |

## Reasoning

- Claude Haiku 5.5: 35.2 (#69)
- GPT-5.2: 50.2 (#35)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 65.7% | 83.6% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 30% | 23% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 52.9% |
| SimpleBench | — | 45.8% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 73.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 86.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 49% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 10.4% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 23% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1445 |
| DTBench | — | 90.9% |
| LMCA | — | 43.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.45 |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.1 |

## Math

- Claude Haiku 5.5: 73.6 (#18)
- GPT-5.2: 60.0 (#38)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 75.1% | 67.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46.3% | 31.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 96.1% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 72% |
| ProofBench | — | 15% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1440 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 40.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 18.8% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Haiku 5.5: 50.8 (#70)
- GPT-5.2: 59.3 (#32)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.6% | 91.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | 37.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 27.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 8.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1445 |

## Multimodal

- Claude Haiku 5.5: 43.7 (#21)
- GPT-5.2: 51.3 (#7)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 47.5% | 38.3% |
| LMArena Vision | — | 1268 |
| VPCT | — | 84% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1405 |

## Multilingual

- Claude Haiku 5.5: —
- GPT-5.2: 53.4 (#67)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1425 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1460 |
| LMArena French | — | 1455 |
| LMArena German | — | 1448 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1420 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1392 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1440 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1433 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Haiku 5.5: —
- GPT-5.2: 74.7 (#89)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1417 |

## Long Context

- Claude Haiku 5.5: —
- GPT-5.2: 44.0 (#78)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | — | 18.2% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1428 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Haiku 5.5: —
- GPT-5.2: 66.8 (#32)

| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1439 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1401 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1703 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1458 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 49.5 on the Noometry Index. Claude Haiku 5.5 costs 24× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or GPT-5.2?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 lists at $1.75 and $14.

### Is Claude Haiku 5.5 or GPT-5.2 better for coding?

GPT-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.6 versus 49.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 400K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Haiku 5.5 and GPT-5.2 share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Haiku 5.5 has 9 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 has 67.