Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash
Updated October 21, 2026. 7 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for coding: it scores 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 75.9 for Claude Haiku 5.5, though on 1 benchmark against 2.
Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 when what matters is LiveBench coding or LiveBench research, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 7
- Claude Haiku 5.5 only
- 55
- Qwen3.8 Flash only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, four public coding benchmarks
Qwen3.8 Flash
Qwen3.8 Flash scores 87.4 against 75.9.
2 and 1 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 43.4.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1263.
Directional only
General
Vals Index
No call
Only Claude Haiku 5.5 has a Vals Index result, 58.7%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 1M tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5
Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.0003, Qwen3.8 Flash $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Haiku 5.5 75.9 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 from 1 benchmark.
- Widest category
- General, 21.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- LiveBench browser: Claude Haiku 5.5 80.0% against Qwen3.8 Flash 48.0%, 32.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.50 against Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 1M tokens.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Bars | Qwen3.8 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 3 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 1 | ||
| Web design | 1 | 0 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 5 | 2 |
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 91.4% | 87.4% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1586 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 36.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 90.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 44.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 2.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | 47.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | 44.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI) | 20.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | 75.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SciCode | 55.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| FrontierCode | 46.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| FrontierSWE | 43.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1605 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1569 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 43.4 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 159.3 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | 81.9% | 74.6% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| LiveBench browser | 80.0% | 48.0% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| LiveBench long agentic | 57.6% | 37.1% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | 5.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 54.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 31.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 43.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 4.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 59.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 70.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 10.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vals Science Index | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| APEX-Agents | 56.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $3,602 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 82.4% | 87.4% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 35.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 44.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 89.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ARC-AGI | 89.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 55.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 30.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| EBR-bench | 43.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 98.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 75.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 46.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ProofBench | 89.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 51.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1263 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1295 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1315 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1292 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1343 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1279 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LiveBench design | 83.1% | 72.8% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 58.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | 53.1% | 74.2% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 63.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 89.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 82.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| DTBench | 95.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LMCA | 51.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Furniture assembly | 47.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Anthropic Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | October 7, 2026 | August 26, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.50 | $0.47 |
| Coding index | 75.9 | 87.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Qwen3.8 Flash for coding?
Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for coding: it scores 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 75.9 for Claude Haiku 5.5, though on 1 benchmark against 2. Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 when what matters is LiveBench coding or LiveBench research, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.47. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Neither: both take 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash comparison based on?
7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Haiku 5.5's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.8 Flash's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.