Model comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs o3-mini
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Haiku 4.5 #80 (Estimated); o3-mini #141 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Haiku 4.5 and o3-mini share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude Haiku 4.5; 9 to o3-mini.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Claude Haiku 4.5 only
- 4
- o3-mini only
- 9
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o3-mini only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Haiku 4.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 55.85 to 46.59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Haiku 4.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 73.3 against 49.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 49.3%.
Claude Haiku 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.00 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens for o3-mini. 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.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Δ | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude Haiku 4.573.3 | Margin← 24.0 | o3-mini49.3 |
| Knowledge | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | o3-mini77.2 |
| Math | Claude Haiku 4.54.9 | MarginNo overlap | o3-miniNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | o3-mini93.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.3%B 49.3%Winner: Claude Haiku 4.5Δ 24SWE-bench Verified: Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 73.3%; o3-mini scored 49.3%. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 4.5 | o3-mini | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5$1 input / $5 output | o3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 output | o3-mini has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | o3-mini160 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | o3-mini7.12 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5200K | o3-mini200K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or o3-mini?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.85 to 46.59. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.3% and 49.3%.
Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or o3-mini?
Claude Haiku 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.3 versus 49.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.