Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) vs Grok 4.6 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) by Anthropic or Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI? 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
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) scores 6.4 points higher (44.2 vs 37.8) but costs 24× as much to run the benchmark ($2242 vs $94.1; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.6 (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) | Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 37.8 | 44.2 | +16.9% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 16.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $94.07 | $2,241.91 | +2283.2% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 24× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 29.47s | 47.23s | +60.3% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 60.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (High): 16.9% more intelligence, 2283.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 60.3% 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.
- Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (High)Grok 4.6 (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/grok-4-6-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-high/grok-4-6-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill