| Signal | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Delta | GLM 5 Turbo |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +33 | |
Benchmarks | 71 | +71 | |
Pricing | 5 | +1 | |
Context window size | 84 | 0 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 80 | -5 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
11
days higher
1
days
18
days higher
Anthropic
Zhipu AI
GLM 5 Turbo saves you $30.00/month
That's $360.00/year compared to Claude Haiku 4.5 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GLM 5 Turbo | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 83 | 83 | -- |
| Rank | #58 | #57 | GLM 5 Turbo |
| Quality Rank | #58 | #57 | GLM 5 Turbo |
| Adoption Rank | #58 | #57 | GLM 5 Turbo |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 200K | 203K | GLM 5 Turbo |
| Pricing | $1.00/$5.00/M | $1.20/$4.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 67 | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
| Benchmarks | 71 | -- | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
| Pricing | 5 | 4 | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
| Context window size | 84 | 84 | GLM 5 Turbo |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
| Output Capacity | 80 | 85 | GLM 5 Turbo |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 83/100 (rank #58), placing it in the top 80% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 83/100 (rank #57), placing it in the top 81% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
GLM 5 Turbo offers 13% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $78.00/month with GLM 5 Turbo vs $90.00/month with Claude Haiku 4.5 - a $12.00 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. GLM 5 Turbo also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (203K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($4.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (83/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Claude Haiku 4.5 and GLM 5 Turbo are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Claude Haiku 4.5
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
GLM 5 Turbo
13% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Claude Haiku 4.5
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Claude Haiku 4.5
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Claude Haiku 4.5
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Anthropic
| Capability | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GLM 5 Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
Anthropic
Zhipu AI
GLM 5 Turbo saves you $0.8400/month
That's 11% cheaper than Claude Haiku 4.5 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GLM 5 Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 200K | 203K |
| Max Output Tokens | 64,000 | 131,072 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Oct 15, 2025 | Mar 15, 2026 |
Both Claude Haiku 4.5 and GLM 5 Turbo score 83/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
Claude Haiku 4.5 is ranked #58 and GLM 5 Turbo is ranked #57 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
GLM 5 Turbo is cheaper at $4.00/M output tokens vs Claude Haiku 4.5's $5.00/M output tokens - 1.3x more expensive. Input token pricing: Claude Haiku 4.5 at $1.00/M vs GLM 5 Turbo at $1.20/M.
GLM 5 Turbo has a larger context window of 202,752 tokens compared to Claude Haiku 4.5's 200,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.