Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3.6 Flash
Side-by-side API pricing and Artificial Analysis performance for Claude Haiku 4.5 (Anthropic) and Qwen3.6 Flash (Alibaba (Qwen)). Green cells mark the better value in each row.
Prices updated Jul 22, 2026, 1:37 AM UTC · refreshed hourly
| Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic | Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen) | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.00 | $0.188 |
| Output $/1M | $5.00 | $1.13 |
| Blended $/1M (3:1) | $2.00 | $0.422 |
| RAG example (30K in / 2K out) | $0.04 | $0.007875 |
| Quality & speed | ||
| Intelligence Index | 29.6 | — |
| Coding Index | 43.9 | — |
| Agentic Index | 16.4 | — |
| Output speed (tok/s) | — | — |
| Time to first token | — | — |
| Specs | ||
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Input modalities | text, image, file | text, image, video |
FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3.6 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Flash has the lower blended API price at $0.422 per 1M tokens (3:1 input:output mix), versus $2.00 for the other model. Prices are live from OpenRouter and refresh about hourly.
Which is better for RAG workloads?
For a typical RAG request (30K input / 2K output tokens), Qwen3.6 Flash costs about $0.007875 per request versus $0.04. Also compare context windows: Claude Haiku 4.5 offers 200K and Qwen3.6 Flash offers 1M.
Which scores higher on Artificial Analysis benchmarks?
Claude Haiku 4.5 leads on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (29.6 vs —). Check coding and agentic indices on this page for workload-specific tradeoffs.