# Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.7 (2026): side-by-side comparison

Source: [GLAD-AI-TOR](https://glad-ia-tor.com) · Full page: https://glad-ia-tor.com/vs/claude-haiku-4-5-vs-claude-opus-4-7
Arena: llm-models · Crowd scores are live visitor verdicts (one per person per tool, never paid, Bayesian-smoothed).

## At a glance

| | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $5/1M out | $25/1M out |
| Crowd score | 67% (2 votes) | 57% (3 votes) |
| provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| contextWindow | 200K tokens | 1M tokens (128K max output) |
| priceIn | $1/1M in | $5/1M in |
| priceOut | $5/1M out | $25/1M out |
| modalities | text, vision (input); text output | text + image input (up to 2576px), text output |
| openWeights | no | no |
| reasoning (1-5) | 3 | 4.5 |
| coding (1-5) | 3.5 | 4.5 |
| writing (1-5) | 3 | 4.5 |
| speed (1-5) | 4.5 | 2.5 |
| valueForMoney (1-5) | 4 | 3 |

### Claude Haiku 4.5

> Anthropic's fastest model: about 90% of Sonnet 4.5's coding skill at $1/$5 per 1M tokens, 200K context.

Strengths:
- 73.3% on SWE-bench Verified, about 90% of Sonnet 4.5's agentic coding at one third of the price
- Fast: more than 2x Sonnet 4 speed per Anthropic, with launch customers reporting 4-5x faster than Sonnet 4.5; ~92-110 output tok/s measured by Artificial Analysis
- Devs report precise, localized code edits that avoid touching irrelevant code, better than GPT-5 mini class in early testing
- Supports both vision input and extended thinking, rare at this price tier at launch

Weaknesses:
- $5/1M output is pricey for a small model: Gemini Flash and GPT mini tiers undercut it several-fold on output-heavy tasks
- 200K context (vs 1M for Sonnet 5/Opus siblings) and 64K max output limit large-codebase and long-output work
- Mediocre cross-domain reasoning: users report weak results on GPQA, MedQA, MMMU style knowledge tasks

Verdict: Pick Haiku 4.5 if you are on the Anthropic stack and need near-Sonnet coding quality at low latency and a third of the price: it is a massive step up from Haiku 3.5 and excels as the worker model in multi-agent pipelines. It remains Anthropic's current small model as of July 2026, so it is the default cheap tier for Claude-based products. Avoid it for deep cross-domain reasoning, very large codebases (200K context cap), or pure cost-per-token shopping, where Gemini Flash and GPT mini tiers are now cheaper, and step up to Sonnet 5 when quality matters more than speed.

Full review: https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-haiku-4-5 · Markdown: https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-haiku-4-5.md

### Claude Opus 4.7

> Anthropic's April 2026 Opus: 87.6% SWE-bench Verified, 1M context, high-res vision, now behind Opus 4.8

Strengths:
- 87.6% SWE-bench Verified (up from 80.8% on Opus 4.6) and 64.3% SWE-bench Pro at launch, ahead of GPT-5.4 (57.7%) and Gemini 3.1 Pro (54.2%)
- 1M-token context window and 128K max output at flat $5/$25 pricing with no long-context premium (300K output via Batch API beta)
- First Claude with high-resolution vision: accepts images up to 2576px on the long edge with pixel-accurate coordinates, ~3x prior detail
- Standout code review: finds more real bugs with stronger cross-file reasoning than rivals in independent tests, and 21% fewer document-reasoning errors than Opus 4.6

Weaknesses:
- New tokenizer inflates token counts roughly 30% for the same text versus pre-4.7 models (per Anthropic's own docs), raising effective per-request cost despite the unchanged sticker price
- Very verbose in agentic use: one benchmark found GPT-5.5 used 72% fewer output tokens on equivalent coding tasks, and reviewers call its narration over-communicative
- Breaking API changes bite migrators: temperature/top_p/top_k and thinking budget_tokens now return 400 errors, and thinking text is hidden by default

Verdict: Choose Opus 4.7 only if you are already pinned to it for reproducibility: Opus 4.8 costs the same $5/$25, keeps an identical API surface, and outperforms it, making it the better default for new projects. It remains a very strong pick for agentic coding, code review and 1M-context document work, and is a clear upgrade over Opus 4.6. Teams migrating from 4.6 should budget for breaking API changes and a tokenizer that yields roughly 30% more tokens per prompt. Cost-sensitive users should look at Sonnet 5, which delivers near-Opus quality at $3/$15 (intro $2/$10 through August 31, 2026).

Full review: https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-opus-4-7 · Markdown: https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-opus-4-7.md

## More

Full llm-models ranking: https://glad-ia-tor.com/hall-of-fame/llm-models

---
This markdown version exists for AI assistants; the canonical page is https://glad-ia-tor.com/vs/claude-haiku-4-5-vs-claude-opus-4-7