Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking vs Sarvam 105B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No sourced benchmark result is currently shared by both models. This page therefore compares only the available metadata, pricing, and runtime rows; it does not name a quality winner.
No comparison
42.97/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking unranked (Not scored); Sarvam 105B #157 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking and Sarvam 105B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking; 11 to Sarvam 105B.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
0
Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking only
2
Sarvam 105B only
11
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking and Sarvam 105B is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Sarvam 105B.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingSarvam 105BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingNot availableSarvam 105B$0 input / $0 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingNot availableSarvam 105BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingNot availableSarvam 105BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Haiku 4.5 Thinking200KSarvam 105B128KClaude Haiku 4.5 Thinking lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingSarvam 105BResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 46.8%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingSarvam 105BResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 11.39%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 26.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingSarvam 105BResult
AA-LCRSource 0.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingSarvam 105BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 11.9%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 73.8%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 10.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -59.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 17.6%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 93.5%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingSarvam 105BResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1152Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5 ThinkingSarvam 105BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 34.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking and Sarvam 105B on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude Haiku 4.5 Thinking and Sarvam 105B today?

Sarvam 105B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.