Head-to-head · multimodal vs multimodal

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs ERNIE 4.5: which model should you choose?

We compared Claude Haiku 4.5 and ERNIE 4.5 on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. ERNIE 4.5 has the stronger average benchmark score; ERNIE 4.5 is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5 is a multimodal model from Anthropic. It offers a 1,000,000-token context window, costs $13.86 per million input tokens and $74.67 per million output tokens, and averages 79.4 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$13.86 / 1M
Output
$74.67 / 1M
Context
1,000,000
Avg score
79.4
Open weights
No
Full Claude Haiku 4.5 page
Baidu

ERNIE 4.5

ERNIE 4.5 is a multimodal model from Baidu. It offers a 65,536-token context window, costs $13.44 per million input tokens and $56.59 per million output tokens, and averages 80.0 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$13.44 / 1M
Output
$56.59 / 1M
Context
65,536
Avg score
80.0
Open weights
No
Full ERNIE 4.5 page

Specification comparison

SpecClaude Haiku 4.5ERNIE 4.5Edge
Input price / 1M$13.86$13.44B
Output price / 1M$74.67$56.59B
Context window1,000,00065,536A
Max output128,00032,768A
Average score79.480.0B
Arena Elo1421.81414.8A
Open weightsNoNoTie

Benchmark comparison

Claude Haiku 4.5 wins 7, ERNIE 4.5 wins 5, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5ERNIE 4.5GapWinner
MMLU-Pro84.183.70.4Claude Haiku 4.5
GPQA Diamond74.177.23.1ERNIE 4.5
SWE-bench Verified69.268.21.0Claude Haiku 4.5
HumanEval84.783.90.8Claude Haiku 4.5
MATH-50081.481.30.1Claude Haiku 4.5
AIME 202576.575.90.6Claude Haiku 4.5
LiveCodeBench71.672.91.3ERNIE 4.5
IFEval85.286.41.2ERNIE 4.5
TruthfulQA79.683.03.4ERNIE 4.5
HellaSwag89.689.20.4Claude Haiku 4.5
MMMU77.678.00.4ERNIE 4.5
Arena Elo1421.81414.87.0Claude Haiku 4.5

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Claude Haiku 4.5 costs about $29.06 per million tokens and ERNIE 4.5 costs about $24.23. ERNIE 4.5 is roughly 17% cheaper than Claude Haiku 4.5. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens, compared with 65,536 for ERNIE 4.5. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, Claude Haiku 4.5 wins 7, ERNIE 4.5 wins 5, and 0 are tied. On the index average, ERNIE 4.5 leads Claude Haiku 4.5 by 0.6 points (80.0 versus 79.4).

The price picture favours ERNIE 4.5. The context picture favours Claude Haiku 4.5. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.

If you need a single default, start with ERNIE 4.5 for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 if

  • You need the larger 1,000,000-token context window.
  • You need the larger 128,000-token output limit.

Choose ERNIE 4.5 if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.

FAQ

Is Claude Haiku 4.5 better than ERNIE 4.5?

On the index average, ERNIE 4.5 leads Claude Haiku 4.5 by 0.6 points (80.0 versus 79.4). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins 7 benchmarks, ERNIE 4.5 wins 5.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or ERNIE 4.5?

ERNIE 4.5 is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $24.23 per million tokens, versus $29.06 for Claude Haiku 4.5.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens. ERNIE 4.5 has 65,536 tokens.

Are these models open weights?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary; ERNIE 4.5 is proprietary.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with ERNIE 4.5 for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Related comparisons