GPT-5.6 Luna vs Claude Haiku 4.5
The cheapest current model from each provider, for high-volume work.
Side by side
| Attribute | GPT-5.6 Luna | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Input, per 1M tokens | $0.20 | $1.00 |
| Output, per 1M tokens | $1.20 | $5.00 |
| Context window | 1,050,000 | 200,000 |
| Provider | OpenAI | Anthropic |
| Tokenizer | o200k_base | Anthropic tokenizer |
| Long-context tier | above 272,000 | none |
| Retires | no date announced | no date announced |
Which to choose
- Reading more than you write
- GPT-5.6 Luna $0.20 against Claude Haiku 4.5 $1 per million input tokens — a wide gap of 5x.
- Writing more than you read
- GPT-5.6 Luna prices output at 6x its input rate, Claude Haiku 4.5 at 5x — so GPT-5.6 Luna's lead widens as answers lengthen.
- Whole documents in one request
- Claude Haiku 4.5 stops at 200,000; GPT-5.6 Luna takes 1,050,000. Past the lower ceiling only GPT-5.6 Luna accepts the request, at any price.
- Past the long-context threshold
- GPT-5.6 Luna above 272,000 bills the whole request higher — $0.40 and $1. GPT-5.6 Luna stays ahead either side of that line.
- 10,000 in, 1,000 out
- $0.0032 on GPT-5.6 Luna, $0.0150 on Claude Haiku 4.5. Over 10,000 such calls that is $118.00 in GPT-5.6 Luna's favour.
- How these counts were arrived at
- GPT-5.6 Luna is counted exactly in your browser; Claude Haiku 4.5 is estimated from a characters-per-token ratio. Close, not exact.
What this page does not tell you. Which model produces better answers. That depends on your task, and this site has no benchmark data — everything above is drawn from published pricing and specifications. Compare quality by running your own prompts through both.