Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Sarvam 105B

Pick Claude Haiku 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Sarvam 105B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the cleaner overall profile here, landing at 63 versus 60. 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 48.5 against 45. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 45%. Sarvam 105B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Haiku 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.80 input / $4.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Sarvam 105B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Sarvam 105B 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. Claude Haiku 4.5 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Sarvam 105B.