+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3.5 Haiku vs GLM-4.6
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
GLM-4.6 leads with 33.4% higher average benchmark score. Claude 3.5 Haiku offers 203.4K more tokens in context window than GLM-4.6. GLM-4.6 is $2.20 cheaper per million tokens. GLM-4.6 supports multimodal inputs. Overall, GLM-4.6 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku was developed as the next generation of Anthropic's fastest model, offering similar speed to Claude 3 Haiku while surpassing Claude 3 Opus on many intelligence benchmarks. Built with low latency, improved instruction following, and accurate tool use, it serves user-facing products, specialized sub-agent tasks, and data-heavy applications.
+
+
+
+
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6 was introduced as an enhanced iteration of the GLM-4 series, designed to provide improved capabilities in bilingual language understanding and generation. Built to incorporate refinements to the GLM architecture, it represents continued advancement in Zhipu AI's model development.
11 months newer
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Anthropic
2024-10-22
GLM-4.6
Zhipu AI
2025-09-30
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input:$0.80
Output:$4.00
+
+
+
+
GLM-4.6
Input:$0.60
Output:$2.00($2.20 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Average Score:41.1%
+
+
+
+
GLM-4.6
Average Score:74.5%(+33.4%)
Performance comparison across key benchmark categories
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Coding40.6%
+
+
+
+
GLM-4.6
Coding68.0%(+27.4%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.3ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 104 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Avg Score:41.1%
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
GLM-4.6
Avg Score:74.5%(+33.4%)
Providers:2