Side-by-side benchmark comparison across knowledge, coding, math, and reasoning.
Claude Haiku 4.5 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 64 to 56. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
o3-mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.80 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Haiku 4.5. o3-mini is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Haiku 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o3-mini only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Claude Haiku 4.5
57.8
o3-mini
82.1
Claude Haiku 4.5
48
o3-mini
49.3
Claude Haiku 4.5
68.8
o3-mini
87.3
Claude Haiku 4.5
86
o3-mini
93.9
Claude Haiku 4.5 is ahead overall, 64 to 56. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMLU, where the scores are 68 and 86.9.
o3-mini has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.1 versus 57.8. Inside this category, MMLU is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
o3-mini has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 49.3 versus 48. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
o3-mini has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 87.3 versus 68.8. Inside this category, AIME 2024 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
o3-mini has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 93.9 versus 86. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.