Model comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Inkling
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Haiku 4.5 #77 (Estimated); Inkling #20 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Haiku 4.5 and Inkling share 1 comparable benchmark result. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude Haiku 4.5; 31 to Inkling.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Claude Haiku 4.5 only
- 4
- Inkling only
- 31
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Inkling if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Haiku 4.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Inkling is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 67.54 to 56.58. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Inkling's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 97.1 against 4.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 77.6%. Claude Haiku 4.5 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Haiku 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.00 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens for Inkling. Inkling is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Haiku 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Inkling gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Haiku 4.5.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Δ | Inkling |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Haiku 4.54.9 | Margin→ 92.2 | Inkling97.1 |
| Coding | Claude Haiku 4.573.3 | Margin← 4.7 | Inkling68.6 |
| Agentic | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling69.4 |
| Knowledge | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling51.6 |
| Multimodal | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling76.5 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling79.8 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.3%B 77.6%Winner: InklingΔ 4.3SWE-bench Verified: Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 73.3%; Inkling scored 77.6%. Inkling wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Inkling | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5$1 input / $5 output | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Claude Haiku 4.5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | InklingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | InklingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5200K | Inkling1M | Inkling lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| JobBenchSource | 16.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 77.1% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | — | 1257 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 32.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 36.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1239 | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 836 | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 23.7% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Haiku 4.5 wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | — | 87.9% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 87.9% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 46% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 30% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 40.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 87.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 29.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 2.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 40.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 63.1% | Not comparable |
MathInkling wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchSource | — | 79.8% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Inkling?
Inkling is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.54 to 56.58. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.3% and 77.6%.
Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Inkling?
Claude Haiku 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.3 versus 68.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Inkling?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 4.9. Claude Haiku 4.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.