Directory · Model comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GLM-5.2
Side-by-side API economics and benchmarks. Per-1M input and output rates, context window, and verified metrics.
Tale of the tape
Head-to-head specs pulled from each model profile.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 4.5 | GLM-5.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Input cost / 1M | $1.00 | $1.40 |
| Output cost / 1M | $5.00 | $4.40 |
| Context window | 200,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| MMLU score | — | — |
Cost verdict
Enter monthly input and output volumes to see total cost savings.
Claude Haiku 4.5
- Input: 1M × $1.00 = $1.00
- Output: 1M × $5.00 = $5.00
- Total
- $6.00
GLM-5.2
- Input: 1M × $1.40 = $1.40
- Output: 1M × $4.40 = $4.40
- Total
- $5.80
Total cost savings
$0.20
GLM-5.2 saves $0.20 per month vs the other model at this volume.
Model routing savings
Uses this page's verified rates. Claude Haiku 4.5 is the premium route (higher combined per-1M cost); GLM-5.2 handles routine traffic.
All premium
Claude Haiku 4.5
$300.00
100% of input and output on the premium route
Routed stack
80% → GLM-5.2
20% → Claude Haiku 4.5
$292.00
- Routine slice
- $232.00
- Premium slice
- $60.00
Monthly savings
$8.00
2.7% lower
Rates pulled from this page's model database entries (claude-haiku-4-5, glm-5-2) — same per-1M input/output figures as Tale of the tape. Production routing needs quality gates and monitoring.
Related comparisons
More head-to-head model matchups.