Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) vs GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) by Anthropic or GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) scores 0.6 points higher (38.4 vs 37.8) but costs 56× as much to run the benchmark ($5294 vs $94.1; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 37.8, and Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) when 37.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) | GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 37.8 | 38.4 | +1.6% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 1.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $94.07 | $5,294.36 | +5528.1% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 56× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.27s | 74.88s | +164.9% GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is 164.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $5.00 / $30.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (High): 1.6% more intelligence, 5528.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 164.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (High)GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-high/gpt-5-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-high/gpt-5-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill