Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GPT-4.1
Claude Haiku 4.5 (2025) and GPT-4.1 (2025) are general-purpose language models from Anthropic and OpenAI. Claude Haiku 4.5 ships a 200k-token context window, while GPT-4.1 ships a 1M-token context window. On SWE-bench Verified, Claude Haiku 4.5 leads by 18.7 pts. On pricing, Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $0.80/1M input tokens versus $2/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.
Claude Haiku 4.5 is ~150% cheaper at $0.80/1M; pay for GPT-4.1 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | multimodal apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed production | multimodal apps, tool-calling agents, and long-context analysis |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 200k | 1M |
| Cheapest output | $4/1M tokens | $8/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 8 tracked | 4 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | SWE-bench Verified leader | 2 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Haiku 4.5 leads the largest shared benchmark signal on SWE-bench Verified by 18.7 points.
- Claude Haiku 4.5 has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $4/1M tokens.
- Claude Haiku 4.5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Local decision data tags Claude Haiku 4.5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- GPT-4.1 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Local decision data tags GPT-4.1 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Haiku 4.5
$1,640
Cheapest tracked route/tier: AWS Bedrock
GPT-4.1
$3,600
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $1,960. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter and Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
- GPT-4.1 is $4/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter and Vercel AI Gateway; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Haiku 4.5 is $4/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2025-10-01 | 2025-04-01 |
| Context window | 200k | 1M |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | decoder only | decoder only |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-02 | 2025-01 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.80/1M tokens | $2/1M tokens |
| Output price | $4/1M tokens | $8/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | Yes |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3 | 54.6 |
| BFCL | 68.7 | 54.0 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, SWE-bench Verified has Claude Haiku 4.5 at 73.3 and GPT-4.1 at 54.6, with Claude Haiku 4.5 ahead by 18.7 points; BFCL has Claude Haiku 4.5 at 68.7 and GPT-4.1 at 54.0, with Claude Haiku 4.5 ahead by 14.7 points. The largest visible gap is 18.7 points on SWE-bench Verified, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint is close: both models cover vision, multimodal input, function calling, tool use, and structured outputs. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.
For cost, Claude Haiku 4.5 lists $0.80/1M input and $4/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while GPT-4.1 lists $2/1M input and $8/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Claude Haiku 4.5 lower by about $2.04 per million blended tokens. Availability is 8 providers versus 4, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 when coding workflow support, lower input-token cost, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose GPT-4.1 when coding workflow support and larger context windows are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Claude Haiku 4.5 or GPT-4.1?
GPT-4.1 supports 1M tokens, while Claude Haiku 4.5 supports 200k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or GPT-4.1?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $0.80/1M input and $4/1M output tokens. GPT-4.1 costs $2/1M input and $8/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or GPT-4.1 open source?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is listed under Proprietary. GPT-4.1 is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Haiku 4.5 or GPT-4.1?
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and GPT-4.1 expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Haiku 4.5 or GPT-4.1?
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and GPT-4.1 expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Where can I run Claude Haiku 4.5 and GPT-4.1?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is available on Microsoft Foundry, Anthropic, Snowflake Cortex, AWS Bedrock, and GCP Vertex AI. GPT-4.1 is available on OpenRouter, Azure OpenAI, OpenAI API, and Vercel AI Gateway. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-22. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.