Head-to-Head Model Comparison

GPT-5 nano vs Claude Haiku 4.5

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Revisado por el equipo de investigación de GetInfoUsÚltima revisión: October 2026Política editorial
Compartir
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
GPT-5 nano vs Claude Haiku 4.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

GPT-5 nano de OpenAI y Claude Haiku 4.5 de Anthropic compiten directamente en el ecosistema actual de IA. GPT-5 nano ofrece una ventana de contexto de 400K tokens a $0.05/$0.40 por millón de tokens (entrada/salida), mientras que Claude Haiku 4.5 ofrece 200K tokens de contexto a $1.00/$5.00 por millón de tokens. Analizamos sus benchmarks, latencia y costos reales.

Comparación Directa (VS)

Cambia y Compara Cualquier Modelo

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
OpenAI

GPT-5 nano

Modelo Ligero y Económico

GPT-5 nano de OpenAI es un modelo de IA diseñado para máxima eficiencia de costos por token y alta velocidad en producción, con ventana de contexto de 400K, velocidad de 250 tokens/s, índice de inteligencia de 35/100 y tarifa de $0.05/$0.4

Intelligence Index35 / 100
Input Token:

$0.05 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.40 / 1M

Context Window:

400K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

34.5%

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

Inferencia Ultrarrápida

Claude Haiku 4.5 de Anthropic es un modelo de IA diseñado para interacción en tiempo real, baja latencia y enrutamiento de alto volumen, con ventana de contexto de 200K, velocidad de 140 tokens/s, índice de inteligencia de 54/100 y tarifa d

Intelligence Index54 / 100
Input Token:

$1.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$5.00 / 1M

Context Window:

200K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

58.2%

Diferencias Clave de un Vistazo

  • GPT-5 nano is 13.9x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • GPT-5 nano has a larger context window (400K vs 200K tokens).
  • GPT-5 nano is faster at 250 tok/s vs 140 tok/s.
  • Claude Haiku 4.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (58.2% vs 34.5%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
CaracterísticaGPT-5 nanoClaude Haiku 4.5
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
3554
Provider
OpenAIAnthropic
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.05 / 1M$1.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.40 / 1M$5.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.05 / 1M$0.77 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
400K tokens~600 A4 pages of text200K tokens~300 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
128K64K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
250 tok/s140 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
34.5%58.2%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
48%62.1%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.01 / 1M$0.10 / 1M

¿Quién gana en cada área?

At-a-glance decision framework
Código
Claude Haiku 4.5
+23.7% SWE-bench lead
Costo
GPT-5 nano
13.9x cheaper monthly runtime
Velocidad
GPT-5 nano
+79% faster generation
Contexto
GPT-5 nano
400K tokens window

Puntuaciones de Benchmarks Verificadas

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

GPT-5 nanoClaude Haiku 4.5
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

34.5%vs58.2%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

48%vs62.1%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

66.5%vs79.5%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1250ptsvs1324pts
Humanity's Last Exam (Frontier Expert Knowledge)

Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.

6%vsN/A
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

18.5%vsN/A
SciCode (Scientific Computing)

Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.

22%vsN/A
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

37.5%vsN/A
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

62%vsN/A
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

57%vsN/A
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

250 tok/s vs140 tok/s

Latencia y Tiempo de Respuesta

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
GPT-5 nano0.38s
Claude Haiku 4.50.28s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
GPT-5 nano2.38s
Claude Haiku 4.53.85s

Simulador Interactivo de Costos de Tokens

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
GPT-5 nano Monthly API Bill
$0.44 / month
$0.05/1M in · $0.4/1M out
Claude Haiku 4.5 Monthly API Bill
$6.15 / month
$1/1M in · $5/1M out
GPT-5 nano saves approximately $5.71 / month (93%) under this workload.13.9x Savings

GPT-5 nano · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Ventana de contexto de 400K con hasta 128K tokens de salida máxima (SWE-bench Verified 34.5% · GPQA Diamond 48%)
  • Rendimiento ágil de 250 tokens/segundo con latencia inicial (TTFT) de solo 380 ms
  • Economía de API competitiva ($0.05/$0.4 por 1M de tokens) con soporte para caché de prompts y salidas JSON estructuradas
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Modelo propietario en la nube; no permite descargar los pesos para ejecución local sin conexión
  • En demostraciones científicas extremas, los modelos de razonamiento pesado de gama alta ofrecen mayor profundidad

Claude Haiku 4.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Ventana de contexto de 200K con hasta 64K tokens de salida máxima (SWE-bench Verified 58.2% · GPQA Diamond 62.1%)
  • Rendimiento ágil de 140 tokens/segundo con latencia inicial (TTFT) de solo 280 ms
  • Economía de API competitiva ($1/$5 por 1M de tokens) con soporte para caché de prompts y salidas JSON estructuradas
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Modelo propietario en la nube; no permite descargar los pesos para ejecución local sin conexión
  • En demostraciones científicas extremas, los modelos de razonamiento pesado de gama alta ofrecen mayor profundidad

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricGPT-5 nanoClaude Haiku 4.5
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.06$0.70
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
42K20K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
18K10K

Especificaciones Técnicas

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

CaracterísticaGPT-5 nanoClaude Haiku 4.5
Official API Model ID (SDK)gpt-5-nanoclaude-haiku-4-5-20251001
API ProtocolOpenAI Responses API & Chat Completions v1Anthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI
Release Date2025-082025-10
Knowledge CutoffSeptember 2024July 2025
ArchitectureNano unified reasoning modelLightweight High-Speed Multimodal Transformer
ParametersConfidentialConfidential
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 800,000 – 2,000,000 TPM4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 800,000 – 2,000,000 TPM
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Flat rate ($0.05/1M in) across full 400K windowStandard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix caching at $0.005/1M (no extra cache-write fee)$0.1/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL
Computer Use / GUI AgentSupported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxNative Web Search tool + Hosted Code Interpreter & File Search RAGNative Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors
Official Fine-Tuning SupportSupervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Direct Preference (DPO) & Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT)Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMCloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpenAI Preparedness Framework Audited & System Card PublishedAnthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise TierSOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

GPT-5 nano vs Claude Haiku 4.5: Respuestas Rápidas (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, GPT-5 nano or Claude Haiku 4.5?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is more intelligent. It scores 54 compared with 35 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

GPT-5 nano is faster, generating 250 tokens per second compared with 140 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

GPT-5 nano is cheaper at $0.05 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $0.77 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Claude Haiku 4.5 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.28s compared with 0.38s.

Which model has a larger context window?

GPT-5 nano has a larger context window, supporting 400K tokens compared with 200K tokens.

Veredicto

Tanto GPT-5 nano (Ideal para máxima eficiencia de costos por token y alta velocidad en producción, sistemas RAG empresariales y automatización mediante API.) como Claude Haiku 4.5 (Ideal para interacción en tiempo real, baja latencia y enrutamiento de alto volumen, sistemas RAG empresariales y automatización mediante API.) destacan en producción: Claude Haiku 4.5 lidera en inteligencia general y programación, GPT-5 nano ofrece mayor velocidad de generación de tokens y GPT-5 nano resulta más rentable para cargas de trabajo API de alto volumen.

Preguntas frecuentes

¿Cuál es mejor para programación y razonamiento, GPT-5 nano o Claude Haiku 4.5?+

En las pruebas de inteligencia compuesta y resolución de código, Claude Haiku 4.5 obtiene la ventaja. Puedes revisar la tabla SWE-bench y GPQA arriba para comparar cada métrica.

¿Cuánto cuesta la API de GPT-5 nano frente a Claude Haiku 4.5?+

GPT-5 nano cuesta $0.05 / $0.40 por millón de tokens de entrada/salida, mientras que Claude Haiku 4.5 cuesta $1.00 / $5.00. En costo combinado, GPT-5 nano es la opción más económica.

¿Qué modelo tiene mayor ventana de contexto y menor latencia?+

GPT-5 nano cuenta con 400K tokens de contexto frente a 200K tokens de Claude Haiku 4.5. En velocidad de inferencia, GPT-5 nano ofrece un rendimiento superior.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Las puntuaciones de benchmarks, precios por token y límites de tasa evolucionan rápidamente. Verifique siempre las especificaciones actuales en la documentación oficial del proveedor.

Fuentes: Documentación oficial de API de OpenAI y Anthropic, tarjetas de sistema y benchmarks independientes (2026).