Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3.6-Plus
Claude Haiku 4.5 (2025) and Qwen3.6-Plus (2026) are agentic coding models from Anthropic and Alibaba. Claude Haiku 4.5 ships a 200k-token context window, while Qwen3.6-Plus ships a 1M-token context window. On SWE-bench Verified, Qwen3.6-Plus leads by 5.5 pts. On pricing, Qwen3.6-Plus costs $0.33/1M input tokens versus $0.8/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.
Qwen3.6-Plus is ~146% cheaper at $0.33/1M; pay for Claude Haiku 4.5 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.6-Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 200k | 1M |
| Cheapest output | $4/1M tokens | $1.95/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 7 tracked | 2 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 1 rows | SWE-bench Verified leader |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Haiku 4.5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Claude Haiku 4.5 uniquely exposes Structured outputs and Code execution in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Claude Haiku 4.5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Qwen3.6-Plus leads the largest shared benchmark signal on SWE-bench Verified by 5.5 points.
- Qwen3.6-Plus has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Qwen3.6-Plus has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $1.95/1M tokens.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3.6-Plus for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.
Claude Haiku 4.5
$1,640
Cheapest tracked route: AWS Bedrock
Qwen3.6-Plus
$748
Cheapest tracked route: Alibaba Cloud PAI-EAS
Estimated monthly gap: $893. Batch, cache, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Qwen3.6-Plus is $2.05/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Structured outputs and Code execution before moving production traffic.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Haiku 4.5 is $2.05/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Claude Haiku 4.5 adds Structured outputs and Code execution in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2025-10-01 | 2026-04-01 |
| Context window | 200k | 1M |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | decoder only | dense |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-02 | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.6-Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.8/1M tokens | $0.33/1M tokens |
| Output price | $4/1M tokens | $1.95/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.6-Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | No |
| Code execution | Yes | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.6-Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3 | 78.8 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, SWE-bench Verified has Claude Haiku 4.5 at 73.3 and Qwen3.6-Plus at 78.8, with Qwen3.6-Plus ahead by 5.5 points. The largest visible gap is 5.5 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 differs most on structured outputs: Claude Haiku 4.5 and code execution: Claude Haiku 4.5. Both models share vision, multimodal input, function calling, and tool use, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
For cost, Claude Haiku 4.5 lists $0.8/1M input and $4/1M output tokens, while Qwen3.6-Plus lists $0.33/1M input and $1.95/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Qwen3.6-Plus lower by about $0.95 per million blended tokens. Availability is 7 providers versus 2, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 when coding workflow support and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3.6-Plus when coding workflow support, larger context windows, and lower input-token cost 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 Qwen3.6-Plus?
Qwen3.6-Plus 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 Qwen3.6-Plus?
Qwen3.6-Plus is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $0.8/1M input and $4/1M output tokens. Qwen3.6-Plus costs $0.33/1M input and $1.95/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3.6-Plus open source?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is listed under Proprietary. Qwen3.6-Plus 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 Qwen3.6-Plus?
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3.6-Plus 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 Qwen3.6-Plus?
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3.6-Plus 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 Qwen3.6-Plus?
Claude Haiku 4.5 is available on Microsoft Foundry, Anthropic, Snowflake Cortex, AWS Bedrock, and GCP Vertex AI. Qwen3.6-Plus is available on OpenRouter and Alibaba Cloud PAI-EAS. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-16. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.