Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5 vs OpenAI: GPT-4o
Side-by-side specs, pricing, and benchmarks. Pick a winner for your team's use case.
Use it in a Space
Spin up a Switchy Space with either model — your whole team @-mentions it with shared context, pooled credits, one memory.
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5OpenAI: GPT-4o
Input $/Mtok$1.00 · $2.50
Output $/Mtok$5.00 · $10.00
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5OpenAI: GPT-4o
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5200K tokens
OpenAI: GPT-4o128K tokens
Bars use square-root scaling so a 1M-token window doesn't crush a 200K one.
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5OpenAI: GPT-4o
2025-10-15
2024-05-13
2024-04-13today
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5
- Provider
- anthropic
- Context
- 200k
- Input $/Mtok
- $1.00
- Output $/Mtok
- $5.00
- Max output
- 64000
- Modalities
- image, text
OpenAI: GPT-4o
- Provider
- openai
- Context
- 128k
- Input $/Mtok
- $2.50
- Output $/Mtok
- $10.00
- Max output
- 16384
- Modalities
- text, image, file
Price delta
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5 is $1.50/Mtok cheaper than OpenAI: GPT-4o on input. Output: Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5 is $5.00/Mtok cheaper than OpenAI: GPT-4o.
Which to pick
Pick **Claude Haiku 4.5** for short, high-volume team chat. Its $0.80 in / $4 out per Mtok pricing undercuts GPT-4o ($2.50 / $10) by roughly 3x on both sides, and the 200k context exceeds GPT-4o's 128k. For triage, classification, and quick transforms it's the obvious cost play.
Pick **GPT-4o** when the request involves vision (charts, photos, document layouts) or you want OpenAI's voice/audio modalities downstream. GPT-4o's multimodal handling is still ahead in mixed-media turns; if the chat is text-only and high-frequency, the price difference favours Haiku.