Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 262K context window.

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 58 versus 56. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Claude Haiku 4.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 73.3 against 58.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 69.2%.

Claude Haiku 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.00 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 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. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 200K for Claude Haiku 4.5.