Roboflow

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5

Compare Claude Haiku 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 side-by-side.

Compare Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 on Vision Evals

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Counting, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 79.3% to 68.9%.

Overall, Claude Haiku 5.5 averages 77.2% (#20 of 61) against 83.8% (#8 of 61) for Claude Sonnet 5.5.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper ($0.0005 vs $0.0065 per sample), while Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster (10.8s vs 13.2s per sample).

Claude Haiku 5.5Claude Sonnet 5.5

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 Comparison Table

Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 8, 2026

PropertyClaude Haiku 5.5Claude Sonnet 5.5
OrganizationAnthropicAnthropic
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateOct 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersundisclosedUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.100$2.00
Output $/1M$0.500$10.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningSupportedDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationSupportedDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionSupportedDemo
OCRSupportedDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringSupportedDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
77.2%
83.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0005$0.0065
Avg speed / sample13.23s10.78s
By task
Object Detection (low)
65.8%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.1 to 66.2
$0.0006
74.3%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 75.3
$0.0098
Object Detection (high)
68.2%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.2 to 69.2
$0.0010
76.8%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.3
$0.014
Counting (low)
68.9%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.9 to 74.3
$0.0003
79.3%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7
$0.0042
Counting (high)
73.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 74.3
$0.0004
82.9%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 83.8
$0.0053
Identification (low)
83.3%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0002
91.7%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0029
Identification (high)
86.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.0003
90.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6
$0.0033
OCR (low)
90.1%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.8 to 91.0
$0.0006
90.6%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.0 to 91.7
$0.0079
OCR (high)
88.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.0 to 89.6
$0.0009
90.9%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 92.3
$0.011
Data Extraction (low)
85.9%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.5 to 87.6
$0.0002
90.7%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.7 to 92.8
$0.0033
Data Extraction (high)
87.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 87.6
$0.0002
93.1%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.8 to 93.8
$0.0036
Reasoning (low)
68.9%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.9 to 70.9
$0.0004
76.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.8
$0.0049
Reasoning (high)
74.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 77.5
$0.0006
83.9%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 85.4
$0.0061

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: Overview

Claude Haiku 5.5

Claude Haiku 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal language model from Anthropic and the smallest member of the Claude 5.5 family, released on October 7, 2026 after Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5. It accepts text and image input and returns text, with a 1M token context window and up to 128K output tokens per request. It is the first Haiku-class model with an adjustable effort parameter: adaptive thinking is on by default and the model decides how much to reason, steered by effort levels from low to max with medium as the default. Its training data cutoff is June 2026. Pricing starts at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens for prompts up to 100K tokens, which Anthropic reports is about 90% lower than Claude Haiku 4.5 for requests in that range.

Anthropic positions Haiku 5.5 for high-volume, latency-sensitive work such as classification, extraction, routing, summarization, and subagent tasks, and describes it as its fastest model to date at standard speed. On visual and agentic evaluations reported at launch, it scores 46.4% on Chartography, a chart reading benchmark, compared with 6.4% for Haiku 4.5 and 61.6% for Sonnet 5.5, and 72.4% on the offline subset of OSWorld 2.1, a screenshot driven computer use benchmark, compared with 15.7% for Haiku 4.5. It uses the same tokenizer as Claude Opus 4.7 and later models, so the same text counts as roughly 30% more tokens than on Haiku 4.5.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal language model from Anthropic and the second release in the Claude 5.5 family, following Claude Opus 5.5. It accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, operating with a 1M token context window and a maximum output of 128K tokens per request. The model uses adaptive thinking by default, allocating variable reasoning effort per request rather than exposing a manual extended thinking toggle, and its training data cutoff is June 2026. Anthropic positions it as a faster, lower cost complement to Opus 5.5 for well scoped everyday tasks, bug fixing, and producing documents, slides, and spreadsheets.

On visual and agentic evaluations reported at launch, Sonnet 5.5 scores 61.6% on Chartography, a chart recognition test, compared with 15.6% for Claude Sonnet 5, and 80.1% on OSWorld 2.1, a computer use benchmark measuring screenshot driven control of a desktop environment, compared with 57.0% for Sonnet 5. It reports 70.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 for agentic coding. Anthropic describes it as the first Sonnet model able to complete Pokemon Red from screenshots alone, and it generates output more than 30% faster than Sonnet 5 while using fewer tokens for equivalent work.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Sonnet 5.5 performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 83.8% (#8 of 61) against 77.2% (#20 of 61) for Claude Haiku 5.5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Counting benchmark at low effort, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads with 79.3% against 68.9%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0005 per sample against $0.0065. Claude Haiku 5.5 is priced at $0.10 per 1M input tokens and $0.50 per 1M output; Claude Sonnet 5.5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 10.8s per inference against 13.2s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.