Head-to-Head Model Comparison

GPT-5 nano vs Claude Haiku 4.5

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Verificato dal team di ricerca di GetInfoUsUltima verifica: October 2026Politica editoriale
Condividi
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 di OpenAI e Claude Haiku 4.5 di Anthropic sono due modelli di IA di riferimento. GPT-5 nano offre una finestra di contesto di 400K token a $0.05/$0.40 per milione di token, mentre Claude Haiku 4.5 mette a disposizione 200K token di contesto a $1.00/$5.00 per milione di token. Di seguito analizziamo benchmark, latenza e costi.

Confronto Diretto (VS)

Cambia e Confronta Qualsiasi Modello

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

Modello Leggero ed Economico

GPT-5 nano di OpenAI è un modello di IA progettato per la massima efficienza dei costi per token e l’inferenza rapida in produzione, con finestra di contesto da 400K, velocità di 250 token/s, indice di intelligenza di 35/100 e tariffa di $0

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

Inferenza Ultra-Rapida

Claude Haiku 4.5 di Anthropic è un modello di IA progettato per le interazioni in tempo reale a bassissima latenza e il routing ad alto volume, con finestra di contesto da 200K, velocità di 140 token/s, indice di intelligenza di 54/100 e ta

Intelligence Index54 / 100
Input Token:

$1.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$5.00 / 1M

Context Window:

200K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

58.2%

Differenze Chiave a Colpo d’Occhio

  • 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 →
FeatureGPT-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

Chi vince in ogni categoria?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Claude Haiku 4.5
+23.7% SWE-bench lead
Cost
GPT-5 nano
13.9x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
GPT-5 nano
+79% faster generation
Context
GPT-5 nano
400K tokens window

Punteggi Benchmark Verificati

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

Latenza e Tempo di Risposta

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

Simulatore Interattivo dei Costi Token

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

  • Finestra di contesto da 400K con capacità massima di output fino a 128K token (SWE-bench Verified 34.5% · GPQA Diamond 48%)
  • Throughput elevato di 250 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 380 ms
  • Economia API competitiva ($0.05/$0.4 per 1M di token) con supporto per prompt caching, tool calling e output JSON strutturati
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Modello cloud proprietario chiuso; non consente il download locale dei pesi per l’esecuzione offline
  • Nelle dimostrazioni scientifiche più estreme, i modelli di ragionamento pesante dedicati offrono maggiore profondità

Claude Haiku 4.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Finestra di contesto da 200K con capacità massima di output fino a 64K token (SWE-bench Verified 58.2% · GPQA Diamond 62.1%)
  • Throughput elevato di 140 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 280 ms
  • Economia API competitiva ($1/$5 per 1M di token) con supporto per prompt caching, tool calling e output JSON strutturati
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Modello cloud proprietario chiuso; non consente il download locale dei pesi per l’esecuzione offline
  • Nelle dimostrazioni scientifiche più estreme, i modelli di ragionamento pesante dedicati offrono maggiore profondità

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

Specifiche Tecniche

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureGPT-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: Risposte Rapide (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.

Verdetto

Sia GPT-5 nano (Ideale per la massima efficienza dei costi per token e l’inferenza rapida in produzione, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) sia Claude Haiku 4.5 (Ideale per le interazioni in tempo reale a bassissima latenza e il routing ad alto volume, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) eccellono in produzione: Claude Haiku 4.5 guida nei benchmark di ragionamento e programmazione, GPT-5 nano garantisce una generazione più rapida e GPT-5 nano offre il miglior rapporto qualità-prezzo per carichi API elevati.

Domande Frequenti (FAQ)

Quale modello è migliore per coding e ragionamento, GPT-5 nano o Claude Haiku 4.5?+

Nell’indice di intelligenza composito e nei benchmark di programmazione prevale Claude Haiku 4.5. Consulta i punteggi SWE-bench e GPQA qui sopra per tutti i dettagli.

Qual è la differenza di prezzo API tra GPT-5 nano e Claude Haiku 4.5?+

GPT-5 nano costa $0.05 / $0.40 per milione di token di input/output, mentre Claude Haiku 4.5 costa $1.00 / $5.00. Nel costo combinato, GPT-5 nano risulta più economico.

Quale modello ha la finestra di contesto più ampia e la velocità maggiore?+

GPT-5 nano supporta 400K token di contesto contro 200K token di Claude Haiku 4.5, mentre GPT-5 nano offre una velocità di generazione superiore.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

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

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

Fonti ufficiali: Documentazione API ufficiale di OpenAI e Anthropic, schede di sistema e benchmark indipendenti (2026).