Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Reasoning
Claude Haiku 4.5 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper and better at reasoning.
Scores updated · 17 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software30Claude Haiku 4.53 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Haiku 4.52 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10Claude Haiku 4.51 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Haiku 4.51 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude Haiku 4.51 of 1 test
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking01Qwen3 Coder Next1 of 3 tests · 2 ties
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3 Coder Next costs 70% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Haiku 4.5 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+66.4points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+27.3points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+19.1points ahead
Where Qwen3 Coder Next pulls ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+6.5points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 17 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Haiku 4.5
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Haiku 4.5 by 9.127.318.2+9.1
- SciCodeClaude Haiku 4.5 by 642.236.2+6
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Haiku 4.5 by 644.238.2+6
AgentsClaude Haiku 4.5
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingClaude Haiku 4.5 by 3.99.35.4+3.9
- Terminal-Bench 4.0tie00tie
ReasoningQwen3 Coder Next
- GPQA DiamondQwen3 Coder Next by 6.567.273.7+6.5
- Humanity's Last Examtie10.410.1tie
- CritPttie00tie
FactsClaude Haiku 4.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Haiku 4.5 by 66.472.76.3+66.4
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Haiku 4.5 by 1.81816.1+1.8
Following instructionsClaude Haiku 4.5
- IFBenchClaude Haiku 4.5 by 19.154.335.2+19.1
Other results5 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Haiku 4.5 by 58-4.4-62.4+58
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3 Coder Next by 24.854.779.5+24.8
- AA IntelligenceClaude Haiku 4.5 by 7.716.99.2+7.7
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Haiku 4.5 by 7.743.936.2+7.7
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Haiku 4.5 by 6.710.33.6+6.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Claude Haiku 4.5 wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents, facts, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 Coder Next wins reasoning, and costs 70% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Haiku 4.5. It wins 3 of the 3 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 Coder Next wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $5.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Coder Next costs $0.30 and $1.50. That makes Qwen3 Coder Next about 70% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 17 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 12 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 5 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.