Claude Haiku vs GPT-3.5-Turbo

Claude Haiku vs GPT-3.5-Turbo: price, speed, context window, and code examples in 2026. Which budget LLM API is faster and cheaper for production?

💥 50p impulse-buy: Power Prompts PDF (first 10 buyers) 30 battle-tested Claude Code prompts · 8-page PDF · paste into CLAUDE.md and never re-type a prompt again · 50p impulse-buy, no commitment

GPT-3.5-Turbo has been the default budget LLM API for two years. Claude Haiku is the challenger. Here's a practical 2026 comparison for production decisions.

Quick comparison

FeatureClaude Haiku 4.5GPT-3.5-Turbo (OpenAI)
Input price$0.80 / M tokens$0.50 / M tokens
Output price$4 / M tokens$1.50 / M tokens
Prompt cachingYes — 90% off cached input ($0.08/M)No native caching
Context window200,000 tokens16,385 tokens
Tool useYesYes
Vision / imageYesYes (gpt-3.5-turbo-vision)
Batch APIYes (50% discount)Yes (50% discount)
Python SDKpip install anthropicpip install openai

Caching math: why Haiku wins for chatbots

A chatbot with a 2,000-token system prompt serving 100,000 requests/month:

Claude Haiku (with caching)GPT-3.5-Turbo (no caching)
System prompt cost$0.08 × 2K × 100K / 1M = $16$0.50 × 2K × 100K / 1M = $100
Per-message (500 in, 200 out)$0.80×500K/1M + $4×200K/1M = $1.20$0.50×500K/1M + $1.50×200K/1M = $0.55
Monthly total$17.20$100.55

Caching turns a 38% token-cost disadvantage into an 83% cost advantage.

Claude Haiku example (Python)

import anthropic

client = anthropic.Anthropic()

response = client.messages.create(
    model="claude-haiku-4-5",
    max_tokens=256,
    system=[{
        "type": "text",
        "text": "You are a sentiment classifier. Reply with one word: POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, or NEUTRAL.",
        "cache_control": {"type": "ephemeral"}   # cache the system prompt
    }],
    messages=[
        {"role": "user", "content": "I love this product! Best purchase this year."}
    ]
)
print(response.content[0].text)   # → POSITIVE
print(f"Cache hit: {response.usage.cache_read_input_tokens} tokens cached")

GPT-3.5-Turbo equivalent (Python)

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI()

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="gpt-3.5-turbo",
    max_tokens=256,
    messages=[
        {"role": "system", "content": "You are a sentiment classifier. Reply with one word: POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, or NEUTRAL."},
        {"role": "user", "content": "I love this product! Best purchase this year."}
    ]
)
print(response.choices[0].message.content)  # → POSITIVE
# No caching — full input billed every request

When to pick each

Use casePick Claude HaikuPick GPT-3.5-Turbo
Long system prompt reused across calls✅ Caching = 90% savings❌ No caching
Large document processing (>16K tokens)✅ 200K context❌ Truncation required
Short-message chat, no repeat context❌ Slightly higher token cost✅ Cheaper per-token
OpenAI SDK already integrated❌ SDK swap needed✅ No change
High-volume batch processing✅ 50% Batch API + caching✅ 50% Batch API

For cost estimation across models and scenarios, see the Claude API Cost Calculator.

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Haiku cheaper than GPT-3.5-Turbo?
claude-haiku-4-5 costs $0.80 input / $4 output per million tokens. GPT-3.5-Turbo costs $0.50 input / $1.50 output. GPT-3.5-Turbo is cheaper for pure token cost — but Claude Haiku supports prompt caching (90% off cached input), making it far cheaper for apps with long repeated system prompts. A chatbot reusing a 2,000-token system prompt 100K times/month saves ~$144 with Haiku caching vs $0 savings with GPT-3.5.
Is Claude Haiku faster than GPT-3.5-Turbo?
Both are fast: Claude Haiku typically delivers 50-100+ tokens/second; GPT-3.5-Turbo is similar. In practice, latency differences are negligible for most use cases. Claude Haiku has a 200K token context window vs GPT-3.5-Turbo's 16K, which eliminates the need for chunking on larger documents.
Does Claude Haiku support tool use?
Yes. Claude Haiku supports tool use (function calling), vision, streaming, JSON mode (via prompt), and the full 200K context window — all API features. GPT-3.5-Turbo also supports function calling and vision. For simple classification, extraction, or summarization tasks, either works well.
What is Claude Haiku best for?
Claude Haiku excels at high-volume, low-cost tasks: text classification, sentiment analysis, entity extraction, translation, short summarization, and routing decisions in multi-agent systems. Its 200K context window (vs 16K for GPT-3.5) makes it better for document processing without chunking.
Should I migrate from GPT-3.5-Turbo to Claude Haiku?
If your workload uses long or repeated system prompts, yes — prompt caching can cut costs dramatically. If your workload is pure short-message chat with no caching benefit and minimal context, GPT-3.5-Turbo's lower token rate may win. Test both on your actual input distribution before deciding.

Free tools

Cost Calculator → API Cookbook → Diff Summarizer → Skills Browser →

More examples

Claude API Python QuickstartClaude API Node.js / TypeScript QuickstartClaude API Streaming in PythonClaude API Streaming in Node.js / TypeScriptClaude API Tool Use in PythonClaude API Tool Use in Node.js / TypeScript