Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GPT-5.2

Across our 12-test suite, GPT-5.2 wins three targeted categories while Claude Haiku 4.5 wins one; eight tests tie. Detailed breakdown: - Tool calling: Claude Haiku 4.5 scores 5 vs GPT-5.2's 4 — Haiku ranks tied for 1st (tied with 16 others) for function selection and argument accuracy, so it’s the better pick for reliable tool orchestration in our testing. - Constrained rewriting: GPT-5.2 4 vs Haiku 3 — GPT-5.2 ranks 6th of 53 here, so it handles tight compression/character limits better in practice. - Creative problem solving: GPT-5.2 5 vs Haiku 4 — GPT-5.2 ties for 1st in this category, indicating stronger non-obvious, feasible idea generation on our tests. - Safety calibration: GPT-5.2 5 vs Haiku 4.5's 2 — GPT-5.2 is tied for 1st on safety calibration in our testing, while Haiku’s score of 2 places it at rank 12 of 55; expect GPT-5.2 to refuse harmful requests more reliably. - Ties (identical scores): structured_output (4/4), strategic_analysis (5/5), faithfulness (5/5), classification (4/4), long_context (5/5), persona_consistency (5/5), agentic_planning (5/5), multilingual (5/5). For those tasks both models perform equivalently in our benchmarks and rank highly (often tied for 1st). External benchmarks: GPT-5.2 scores 73.8% on SWE-bench Verified and 96.1% on AIME 2025 — both results are Epoch AI data and placed GPT-5.2 at rank 5 of 12 on SWE-bench Verified and rank 1 of 23 on AIME 2025 in those external sets. Claude Haiku 4.5 has no external SWE/AIME scores in the payload. In short: GPT-5.2 shows clear advantages for safety-sensitive workflows, math/competition tasks, and creative problem solving; Claude Haiku 4.5 is notably stronger (in our tests) only at tool calling and matches GPT-5.2 on many core capabilities.

Pricing in the payload is per mTok (per 1,000 tokens). Claude Haiku 4.5: input $1.00/mTok, output $5.00/mTok. GPT-5.2: input $1.75/mTok, output $14.00/mTok. Assuming a 50/50 split between input and output tokens (common for chat + generation workloads): 1M tokens = 1,000 mTok -> Haiku ≈ $3,000/month (500 mTok input × $1 + 500 mTok output × $5). GPT-5.2 ≈ $7,875/month (500×$1.75 + 500×$14). At 10M tokens/month multiply by 10 (Haiku $30,000 vs GPT $78,750). At 100M tokens/month multiply by 100 (Haiku $300,000 vs GPT $787,500). The absolute gap grows linearly: GPT-5.2 costs ~$4,875 more at 1M tokens, ~$48,750 at 10M, and ~$487,500 at 100M under this split. Cost-sensitive teams (startups, high-volume products, or applications with heavy generation) should care most; teams that need GPT-5.2’s strengths may accept the higher bill.

Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 if you need a low-cost, high-context model that ties on many core capabilities (strategic analysis, long context, multilingual, persona consistency) and wins at tool calling — ideal for high-volume apps, tool-driven agents, or budget-constrained deployments. Choose GPT-5.2 if safety calibration, constrained rewriting, creative problem solving, or top external math/coding benchmarks matter (GPT-5.2 scores 96.1 on AIME 2025 and 73.8 on SWE-bench Verified per Epoch AI) — accept the higher per-mTok bill for those gains.