Model Comparison

GLM-4.6 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku

GLM-4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-4.6 is 1.8x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

GLM-4.6 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified), while Claude 3.5 Haiku is better at 0 benchmarks.

GLM-4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

GLM-4.6 costs less

For input processing, GLM-4.6 ($0.55/1M tokens) is 1.5x cheaper than Claude 3.5 Haiku ($0.80/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-4.6 ($2.00/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Claude 3.5 Haiku ($4.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Haiku is more expensive than GLM-4.6.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Input tokens$0.55
Output tokens$2.00
Best providerFireworks
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude 3.5 Haiku accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to GLM-4.6's 131,072 tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while GLM-4.6 is limited to 131,072 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

GLM-4.6 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Claude 3.5 Haiku does not.

GLM-4.6 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GLM-4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

GLM-4.6 is licensed under MIT, while Claude 3.5 Haiku uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

GLM-4.6

MIT

Open weights

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-4.6 was released on 2025-09-30, while Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22.

GLM-4.6 is 11 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.

GLM-4.6

Sep 30, 2025

6 months ago

11mo newer
Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

GLM-4.6 is available from Fireworks, DeepInfra. Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic.

GLM-4.6

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.55/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.19/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M

Claude 3.5 Haiku

bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $5.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Zhipu AI
Supports multimodal inputs
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher GPQA score (81.0% vs 41.6%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (68.0% vs 40.6%)
Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Zhipu AI
GLM-4.6
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-4.6 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku

GLM-4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. GLM-4.6 is made by Zhipu AI and Claude 3.5 Haiku is made by Anthropic. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
GLM-4.6 scores AIME 2025: 93.9%, LiveCodeBench v6: 82.8%, GPQA: 81.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 68.0%, BrowseComp: 45.1%. Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%.
GLM-4.6 is 1.5x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-4.6 costs $0.55/M input and $2.00/M output via fireworks. Claude 3.5 Haiku costs $0.80/M input and $4.00/M output via bedrock.
GLM-4.6 supports 131K tokens and Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (131K vs 200K), input pricing ($0.55 vs $0.80/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
GLM-4.6 is developed by Zhipu AI and Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic.