Grok 4.1 Fast vs Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GLM-4.6V-Flash
Grok 4.1 Fast comes out ahead, 66 to 63 and 47 on our weighted score, though GLM-4.6V-Flash is 5% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
xAIGrok 4.1 Fast
66/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.50
- Context2M
AnthropicClaude Haiku 4.5
47/100- ECI142.2
- Price$1.00 / $5.00
- Context200K
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.6V-Flash
63/100- ECI—
- Price$0.161 / $0.559
- Context128K
Grok 4.1 Fast is our pick
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against GLM-4.6V-Flash (63) and Claude Haiku 4.5 (47). It leads on context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceGLM-4.6V-FlashGLM-4.6V-Flash $0.261 · Grok 4.1 Fast $0.275 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGrok 4.1 FastGrok 4.1 Fast 2,000,000 · Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 · GLM-4.6V-Flash 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Haiku 4.5 and GLM-4.6V-FlashGrok 4.1 Fast: Text, Images · Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs · GLM-4.6V-Flash: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingGLM-4.6V-FlashPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Grok 4.1 Fast | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GLM-4.6V-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 73 | 34 | 74 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 50 | 80 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 72 | 32 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 66/100 | 47/100 | 63/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Grok 4.1 FastxAI | Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic | GLM-4.6V-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 142.2 | — |
| ECI rank | — | #102 of 165 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 71.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 66.7% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 13.2% | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.20 | $1.00 | $0.161 (best) |
| Output | $0.50 (best) | $5.00 | $0.559 |
| Cached input | — | $0.10 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.275 | $2.00 | $0.261 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 6 providers | Official Anthropic API | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 2,000,000 tokens (best) | 200,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 30,000 tokens | 64,000 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | claude-haiku-4-5 | glm-4.6v-flash |
| API providers | 8 | 48 (best) | 6 |
| Released | Nov 19, 2025 | Oct 15, 2025 | Dec 8, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Feb 28, 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Grok 4.1 Fast$3.00
- Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
- GLM-4.6V-Flash$2.73
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Grok 4.1 Fast, Claude Haiku 4.5 or GLM-4.6V-Flash?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against GLM-4.6V-Flash (63) and Claude Haiku 4.5 (47). It leads on context window. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast, Claude Haiku 4.5 or GLM-4.6V-Flash?
GLM-4.6V-Flash is cheaper at $0.161 input / $0.559 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers; free on Z.AI). Grok 4.1 Fast costs $0.20 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers); Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.261 per million tokens for GLM-4.6V-Flash versus $0.275 for Grok 4.1 Fast (1.1× as much) and $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (7.7× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Grok 4.1 Fast has not been scored yet, Claude Haiku 4.5 has an ECI of 142.2 and GLM-4.6V-Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Grok 4.1 Fast, Claude Haiku 4.5 and GLM-4.6V-Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.1 Fast has the largest context window at 2,000,000 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 128,000 for GLM-4.6V-Flash. Maximum output per response: Grok 4.1 Fast up to 30,000, Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000, GLM-4.6V-Flash up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Grok 4.1 Fast accepts text and images; Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; GLM-4.6V-Flash accepts text, images and video. Claude Haiku 4.5 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.6V-Flash publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.1 Fast and Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.6V-Flash is the newest, released Dec 8, 2025. Grok 4.1 Fast came out Nov 19, 2025; Claude Haiku 4.5 came out Oct 15, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Grok 4.1 Fast vs Nemotron Nano 12B v2 VLNVIDIA
- Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- Grok 4.1 Fast vs Jamba MiniAI21 Labs
- Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 143.7
- Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Mistral Medium 3.5Mistral AI · ECI 141.5
- Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Alibaba (Qwen) · ECI 143.8
