AnthropicClaude Haiku 4.5VSOpenAIGPT-5.6 Terra

Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|Updated: June 2026

Our Take

This matchup represents a clear tradeoff between peak intelligence and budget efficiency. GPT-5.6 Terra is noticeably superior (holding a 21.9% average lead in benchmarks), but it carries a significant 2.8x price premium. Choose GPT-5.6 Terra if you need top-tier reasoning or code debugging, but for high-volume pipelines, Claude Haiku 4.5 is the smarter business decision.

Was this recommendation helpful?

Model Specs

Claude Haiku 4.5

Website

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)

39.5%

excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases

Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)

73%

graduate-level science QA

Cost & Context

Cost (per 1M tokens)2.8x cheaper

$2.00Input: $1.00 | Output: $5.00

Context Window

200k tokens

Model Specs

GPT-5.6 Terra

Website

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+23.9%)

63.4%

excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases

Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+19.9%)

92.9%

graduate-level science QA

Cost & Context

Cost (per 1M tokens)

$5.63Input: $2.50 | Output: $15.00

Context WindowLarger

1.05M tokens

Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions about Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GPT-5.6 Terra

Claude Haiku 4.5 is cheaper than GPT-5.6 Terra. Claude Haiku 4.5 has a blended cost of $2.00/1M tokens, which is about 2.8x cheaper than GPT-5.6 Terra at $5.63/1M tokens.

GPT-5.6 Terra is better for coding tasks on this benchmark. It scores 63.4% on swe-bench-pro (excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases) compared to Claude Haiku 4.5 which scores 39.5%.

Related Matchups

Explore similar comparisons for Claude Haiku 4.5 and GPT-5.6 Terra.

Browse More Comparisons

AnthropicClaude Haiku 4.5

AnthropicClaude Haiku 4.5

OpenAIGPT-5.6 Luna

Compare Specs

Do you want to find a model for your constraints?

Use our interactive model finder to filter LLMs by reasoning capability, coding performance, cost, and context length.

Open Model Finder