Haiku monthly cost for 1,000 requests with 100K input and 20K output tokens each.
MODEL COMPARISON · VERIFIED OCTOBER 8, 2026
Haiku 5.5
vs Sonnet 5.5
A practical comparison of API price, prompt caching, speed and workload fit—plus worked examples that show the real token-cost gap.
Choose Haiku for scale. Choose Sonnet for harder work.
Haiku 5.5 is the cost-and-latency default for narrow, repeatable, high-volume tasks. Sonnet 5.5 costs more, but is the better candidate for complex coding and agentic workflows where stronger execution can avoid retries or human correction. The winning model is the one with the lowest cost per successful task—not simply the lowest token rate.
01 / PRICE
Haiku costs up to 95% less at equal token counts.
Prices are USD per one million tokens on the Claude Platform.
| Per 1M tokens | Haiku 5.5 ≤100K prompt | Haiku 5.5 >100K prompt | Sonnet 5.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input | $0.10 | $0.50 | $2.00 |
| Output | $0.50 | $2.50 | $10.00 |
| Cache read | $0.01 | $0.05 | $0.10 |
| Cache write · 5 min | $0.125 | $0.625 | $2.50 |
At equivalent input and output token counts, short-prompt Haiku 5.5 is 95% cheaper than Sonnet 5.5. Above 100K prompt tokens, Haiku’s input and output rates are 75% lower. Actual task cost can narrow—or widen—when models use different numbers of tokens, retries and tool calls.
Calculate a Haiku workload02 / WORKED EXAMPLES
What does the price gap look like?
These examples compare identical token counts before batch or regional adjustments.
Sonnet monthly cost for that same 1,000-request workload.
Difference before considering quality, retries, caching or different output lengths.
For a longer 200K-input, 50K-output request, Haiku 5.5 costs $0.225 and Sonnet 5.5 costs $0.90 at list price—a 75% difference.
03 / MODEL FIT
Which model should you use?
Route work by complexity. A two-model system can be more economical than forcing every task through one model.
Choose Haiku 5.5
- Summarization, classification and routing at volume
- Compaction and narrowly scoped subagent tasks
- Real-time chat, voice or live-support experiences
- Workloads where latency and unit economics dominate
Choose Sonnet 5.5
- Well-scoped coding and bug-fixing tasks
- Agentic workflows that require stronger execution
- Polished documents, slides and spreadsheets
- Tasks where a failed attempt costs more than extra tokens
04 / ROUTING RULE
Start cheap, then escalate deliberately.
A practical production pattern.
Haiku 5.5 → validate result → Sonnet 5.5 on low confidence or failureKeep the escalation trigger measurable: schema validation, unit tests, confidence thresholds or task-specific evaluators. Compare total cost, latency and success rate—not isolated benchmark scores.
05 / FAQ
Quick answers
Is Haiku 5.5 always 95% cheaper than Sonnet 5.5?
No. The 95% figure compares equal input and output token counts for prompts up to 100K. Longer Haiku prompts use a higher tier, and task cost also depends on caching, output length, retries and tool calls.
Which model is faster?
Anthropic describes Haiku 5.5 as its fastest model at standard speed. Real latency depends on workload, provider, region, load and service conditions, so measure your own p50 and p95 latency.
When is Sonnet worth the higher price?
When its additional capability materially improves task success, reduces retries or lowers human review. Run both models on a representative evaluation set and calculate cost per successful task.
What are the model IDs?
Anthropic lists claude-haiku-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5 on the Claude Platform. Confirm current documentation before deploying.
Method and sources. Pricing, model IDs and workload guidance were verified against Anthropic’s official Haiku 5.5 announcement and Sonnet product page on October 8, 2026. This independent comparison is not affiliated with Anthropic. Haiku source · Sonnet source.