ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Codestral 25.08 vs GLM-4.7

Too close to call on our weighted score (Claude Haiku 4.5 47, Codestral 25.08 47, GLM-4.7 41). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 4.5

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    47/100
    • ECI142.2
    • Price$1.00 / $5.00
    • Context200K
  2. Mistral AI

    Codestral 25.08

    Released Jul 30, 2025

    47/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context128K
  3. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.7

    Released Dec 22, 2025

    41/100
    • ECI143.7
    • Price$0.60 / $2.20
    • Context205K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Claude Haiku 4.5 47/100, Codestral 25.08 47/100, GLM-4.7 41/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Codestral 25.08 on price and GLM-4.7 for long inputs. 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 priceCodestral 25.08Codestral 25.08 $0.45 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-4.7GLM-4.7 204,800 · Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 · Codestral 25.08 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Codestral 25.08: Text · GLM-4.7: Text
  • Self-hostingGLM-4.7Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Haiku 4.5Codestral 25.08GLM-4.7
Price50%346448
Inputs & features30%803535
Context window20%322432
Overall100%47/10047/10041/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Codestral 25.08 vs GLM-4.7 specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Haiku 4.5AnthropicCodestral 25.08Mistral AIGLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)142.2—143.7 (best)
ECI rank#102 of 165—#94 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions71.2%—83.3% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.7%—83.3% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions13.2%—32.2% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$1.00$0.30 (best)$0.60
Output$5.00$0.90 (best)$2.20
Cached input$0.10$0.03 (best)$0.11
Blended (3:1)$2.00$0.45 (best)$1.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIOfficial Mistral APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens128,000 tokens204,800 tokens (best)
Max output64,000 tokens8,192 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoNo
PDFsYesNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryOpen
API model IDclaude-haiku-4-5codestral-2508glm-4.7
API providers48 (best)1131
ReleasedOct 15, 2025Jul 30, 2025Dec 22, 2025
Knowledge cutoffFeb 28, 2025—Apr 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
  • Codestral 25.08$4.80
  • GLM-4.7$10.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Haiku 4.5, Codestral 25.08 or GLM-4.7?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Claude Haiku 4.5 47/100, Codestral 25.08 47/100, GLM-4.7 41/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Codestral 25.08 on price and GLM-4.7 for long inputs. 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, Claude Haiku 4.5, Codestral 25.08 or GLM-4.7?

Codestral 25.08 is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). GLM-4.7 costs $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); 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 $0.45 per million tokens for Codestral 25.08 versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (2.2× as much) and $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (4.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Claude Haiku 4.5 has an ECI of 142.2, Codestral 25.08 has not been scored yet and GLM-4.7 has an ECI of 143.7.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Haiku 4.5, Codestral 25.08 and GLM-4.7 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?

GLM-4.7 has the largest context window at 204,800 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 128,000 for Codestral 25.08. Maximum output per response: Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000, Codestral 25.08 up to 8,192, GLM-4.7 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Codestral 25.08 accepts text; GLM-4.7 accepts text. Claude Haiku 4.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-4.7 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 4.5 and Codestral 25.08 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

GLM-4.7 is the newest, released Dec 22, 2025. Claude Haiku 4.5 came out Oct 15, 2025; Codestral 25.08 came out Jul 30, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 2025, GLM-4.7 Apr 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.