Live data from Hacker News

Claude Haiku 4.5

anthropic.com

41–50 of 292 posts

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#42
post #12

$1/M input tokens and $5/M output tokens is good compared to Claude Sonnet 4.5 but nowadays thanks to the pace of the industry developing smaller/faster LLMs for agentic coding, you can get comparable models priced for much lower which matters at the scale needed for agentic coding. Given that Sonnet is still a popular model for coding despite the much higher cost, I expect Haiku will get traction if the quality is a…

Yeah, I'm a bit disappointed by the price. Claude 3.5 Haiku was $0.8/$4, 4.5 Haiku is $1/$5. I was hoping Anthropic would introduce something price-competitive with the cheaper models from OpenAI and Gemini, which get as low as $0.05/$0.40 (GPT-5-Nano) and $0.075/$0.30 (Gemini 2.0 Flash Lite).

There's probably less margin on the low end, so they don't want to focus on capturing it.

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#43
post #35
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why we're paying for caching at all (except: model providers can charge for it). It's almost extortion - the provider stores some data for 5min on some disk, and gets to sell their highly limited GPU resources to someone else instead (because you are using the kv cache instead of GPU capacity for a good chunk of your input tokens). They charge you 10% of their GPU-level prices for effectively _not_…

It's not about storing data on disk, it's about keeping data resident in memory.

Fascinating, so I have to think more "pay for RAM/redis" than "pay for SSD"?

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#44
post #38

I am really interested in the future of Opus; is it going to be an absolute monster, and continue to be wildly expensive? Or is the leap from 4 -> 4.5 for it going to be more modest.

Technically, they released Opus 4.1 a few weeks ago, so that alone hints at a smaller leap from 4.1 -> 4.5, compared to the leap from Sonnet 4 -> 4.5. That is, of course, if those version numbers represent anything but marketing, which I don't know.

I had forgotten that, given that Sonnet pretty much blows Opus out of the water these days.

Yeah, given how multi-dimensional this stuff is, I assume it's supposed to indicate broad things, closer to marketing than anything objective. Still quite useful.

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#45
post #34

At augmentcode.com, we've been evaluating Haiku for some time, it's actually a very good model. We found out it's 90% as good as Sonnet and is ~34% faster than sonnet! Where it doesn't shine much is on very large coding task. but it is a phenomenal model for small coding tasks and the speed improvement is much welcome

90% as good as Sonnet 4 or 4.5? Openrouter just started reporting, and it's saying Haiku is 2x as fast (60tps vs 125tps) and 2-3x less latent (2-3s vs 1s)

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#47
post #30

Very preliminary testing is very promising, seems far more precise in code changes over GPT-5 models in not ingesting irrelevant to the task at hand code sections for changes which tends to make GPT-5 as a coding assistant take longer than sometimes expected. With that being the case, it is possible that in actual day-to-day use, Haiku 4.5 may be less expensive than the raw cost breakdown may appear initially, though…

Those numbers don’t mean anything without average token usage stats.

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#48
Why I use cheaper models for summaries (a lot ogf gemini-2.5-flash), what’s the use case of cheaper AI for coding? Getting more errors, or more spaghetti code, seems never worth it.

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#49
post #18

Pretty cute pelican on a slightly dodgy bicycle: https://tools.simonwillison.net/svg-render#%3Csvg%20viewBox%...

Have you noticed image generation models tend to really struggle with the arms on archers. Could you whip up a quick test of some kind of archer on horseback firing a flaming arrow at a sailing ship in a lake, and see how all the models do?

Re: Claude Haiku 4.5

#50
post #18

Pretty cute pelican on a slightly dodgy bicycle: https://tools.simonwillison.net/svg-render#%3Csvg%20viewBox%...

I’m surprised none of the frontier model companies have thrown this test in as an Easter egg.

Because then they would have to admit that they try to game benchmarks
Post reply on HN