ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B comes out ahead, 65 to 58 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 4.5

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI142.4
    • Price$1.00 / $5.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 4.5
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

    Released Feb 15, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is our pick

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (58). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.5 397B-A17BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 · Claude Haiku 4.5 142.4
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 · Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 397B-A17BClaude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3.5 397B-A17BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Haiku 4.5Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6974
Price25%3644
Inputs & features15%8090
Context window10%3237
Overall100%58/10065/100
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 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Haiku 4.5AnthropicQwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)142.4146.7 (best)
ECI rank#90 of 148#67 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions71.2%86.4% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—31.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.7%88.9% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions13.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$1.00$0.60 (best)
Output$5.00$3.60 (best)
Cached input$0.10—
Blended (3:1)$2.00$1.35 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output64,000 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDclaude-haiku-4-5qwen3.5-397b-a17b
API providers34 (best)23
ReleasedOct 15, 2025Feb 15, 2026
Knowledge cutoffFeb 28, 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
  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (58). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is cheaper at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 $1.35 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B versus $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 (#67 of 148) and Claude Haiku 4.5 142.4 (#90 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (144.8–148.2 vs 139.5–144.3), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 86.4%, Claude Haiku 4.5 71.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 88.9%, Claude Haiku 4.5 66.7%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5. Maximum output per response: Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the newest, released Feb 15, 2026. 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons