The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs MAI-Thinking-1

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 32.9.

Anthropic · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 32.9, ranking #19 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Haiku 5.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Haiku 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.0 and ranks #19 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose MAI-Thinking-1

  • you are already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic
MAI-Thinking-1
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.0
#19
32.9
#116
Reasoning
47.2
#27
33.7
#105
Coding
40.2
#13
19.0
#120
Agents
33.3
#28
12.5
#113
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$0.10 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Haiku 5.5
MAI-Thinking-1
Math
25.7#110
33.7#55
Tool use
20.3#59
10.7#129
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

36 reported for Claude Haiku 5.5 · 23 for MAI-Thinking-1

2 shared

Claude Haiku 5.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (HealthBench Professional, SWE-Bench Pro), while MAI-Thinking-1 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Haiku 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Haiku 5.5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Haiku 5.5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Microsoft
MAI-Thinking-1
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas MAI-Thinking-1 does not.

Claude Haiku 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MAI-Thinking-1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

MAI-Thinking-1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07, while MAI-Thinking-1 was released on 2026-06-02.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is 4 months newer than MAI-Thinking-1.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Oct 7, 2026

1 days ago

4mo newer
MAI-Thinking-1

Jun 2, 2026

4 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Haiku 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while MAI-Thinking-1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Haiku 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without MAI-Thinking-1's cutoff date.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Jun 2026

MAI-Thinking-1

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Haiku 5.5
✓ Preferred
MAI-Thinking-1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Haiku 5.5 vs MAI-Thinking-1.

Which is better, Claude Haiku 5.5 or MAI-Thinking-1?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 32.9. Claude Haiku 5.5 is made by Anthropic and MAI-Thinking-1 is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Haiku 5.5 compare to MAI-Thinking-1 in benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores Global-MMLU: 87.8%, MILU: 87.6%, BenchCAD (with Python tool): 87.0%, Chartography: 86.2%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 83.7%. MAI-Thinking-1 scores LongFact: 98.0%, AIME 2025: 97.0%, AIME 2026: 94.5%, GraphWalks: 90.0%, AIR-Bench: 88.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Haiku 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1?

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and MAI-Thinking-1 supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Haiku 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.0 vs 32.9), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Haiku 5.5 and MAI-Thinking-1?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and MAI-Thinking-1 is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons