Claude 4.5 Haiku vs Claude 4.7 Opus: pricing & cost comparison
On input tokens, Claude 4.5 Haiku is the cheaper of the two — 93% less per million ($1 vs $15). On output, Claude 4.5 Haiku is 93% cheaper ($5 vs $75) — and since output is usually the dominant cost driver, that gap matters more than it looks.
Side by side
| Claude 4.5 Haiku | Claude 4.7 Opus | |
|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $1 | $15 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $5 | $75 |
| Context window | 200,000 | 200,000 |
| Token-count accuracy | ±2% | ±2% |
| Cost — 10,000 input + 2,000 output tokens | $0.02 | $0.3 |
What a real request costs
Take a representative turn — 10,000 input + 2,000 output tokens. Claude 4.5 Haiku comes to $0.02, Claude 4.7 Opus to $0.3. Across 100,000 requests that's a $28000 swing in favour of Claude 4.5 Haiku. To run the numbers on your actual prompt, paste it into the calculator and toggle Compare across all models.
Which should you pick?
Both are Anthropic models, so you can move between them without changing SDKs or re-tokenising — route the routine 80% of traffic to the cheaper one and reserve Claude 4.7 Opus for the genuinely hard requests. See the full breakdown on the dedicated pages for Claude 4.5 Haiku and Claude 4.7 Opus.
FAQ
- Is Claude 4.5 Haiku or Claude 4.7 Opus cheaper?
- For a typical request (10,000 input + 2,000 output tokens), Claude 4.5 Haiku is cheaper — about 93% less, or roughly $28000 saved per 100,000 requests. Claude 4.5 Haiku runs $1/$5 per 1M input/output tokens; Claude 4.7 Opus runs $15/$75.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both support a 200,000-token context window.
- How accurate are these token counts?
- Claude 4.5 Haiku: Approximated with cl100k_base — drift typically <2% on English and code. Claude 4.7 Opus: Approximated with cl100k_base — drift typically <2% on English and code. The dollar math itself is exact once the token count is known.