Roboflow

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B

Compare Claude Haiku 5.5 and Qwen3.5-27B side-by-side.

Compare Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B 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 Qwen3.5-27B on Vision Evals

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

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Claude Haiku 5.5 leads 65.8% to 50.5%.

Overall, Claude Haiku 5.5 averages 77.2% (#20 of 61) against 70.8% (#29 of 61) for Qwen3.5-27B.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is both cheaper ($0.0005 vs $0.0043 per sample) and faster (13.2s vs 80.4s per sample).

Claude Haiku 5.5Qwen3.5-27B

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B Comparison Table

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

PropertyClaude Haiku 5.5Qwen3.5-27B
OrganizationAnthropicQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateOct 2026Feb 2026
Context Window1.0M262K
Parametersundisclosed27B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.100$0.260
Output $/1M$0.500$2.60
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%
70.8%
Quantizationsself-hosted
BF1670.8%FP868.2%AWQ-INT469.3%hardware →
Avg cost / sample$0.0005$0.0043
Avg speed / sample13.23s80.37s
By task
Object Detection (low)
65.8%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.1 to 66.2
$0.0006
50.5%
±3.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 46.1 to 53.0
$0
Object Detection (high)
68.2%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.2 to 69.2
$0.0010
–
Counting (low)
68.9%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.9 to 74.3
$0.0003
67.6%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.2 to 68.9
$0
Counting (high)
73.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 74.3
$0.0004
–
Identification (low)
83.3%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0002
80.2%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 84.4
$0
Identification (high)
86.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.0003
–
OCR (low)
90.1%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.8 to 91.0
$0.0006
84.7%
±3.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.8 to 87.3
$0
OCR (high)
88.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.0 to 89.6
$0.0009
–
Data Extraction (low)
85.9%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.5 to 87.6
$0.0002
83.8%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.5 to 85.6
$0
Data Extraction (high)
87.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 87.6
$0.0002
–
Reasoning (low)
68.9%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.9 to 70.9
$0.0004
58.1%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 60.3
$0
Reasoning (high)
74.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 77.5
$0.0006
–

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B: 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.

Qwen3.5-27B

Qwen3.5-27B is a multimodal dense hybrid model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team and released in February 2026 as a high-precision entry in the Qwen3.5 "Medium" series. Unlike its Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) siblings, the 27B model utilizes a dense architecture combining Gated Delta Networks with a feed-forward structure, activating its full parameter suite for every inference to maximize reliability. This design provides the highest instruction-following and coding accuracy in its class, with a notable IFEval score of 95.0. The model features a native 262K-token context window, extensible to 1M tokens via YaRN (RoPE scaling), and is released under the Apache-2.0 license.

Optimized for agentic workflows, Qwen3.5-27B employs an early-fusion architecture that treats visual and textual data as a unified stream for deep cross-modal reasoning. This unified approach allows the model to excel in technical analysis and software engineering, matching GPT-5-mini with a 72.4% score on SWE-bench Verified. While the larger MoE variants in the family lead in raw knowledge benchmarks, the 27B model offers a stable and high-density alternative for structured data extraction and spatial perception, contributing to the Qwen3.5 family’s generational leap in OCR accuracy over the previous Qwen3-VL series.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Haiku 5.5 performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 77.2% (#20 of 61) against 70.8% (#29 of 61) for Qwen3.5-27B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Claude Haiku 5.5 leads with 65.8% against 50.5%. 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 $0.0043. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 13.2s per inference against 80.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.