Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Perplexity: Sonar benchmark

Name: Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Perplexity: Sonar AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude 3.5 Haiku (Anthropic) and Perplexity: Sonar (perplexity) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. Perplexity: Sonar wins on output price at $1/1M. Claude 3.5 Haiku has the larger context window (200k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Previous cheap Claude. Haiku 4.5 is the current $1/$5 SKU.

Elo 1,224$4/1M out

perplexity

Perplexity: Sonar

Auto-discovered from OpenRouter (perplexity/sonar). Preview until a second source matches.

$1/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.5 Haiku (8)vsPerplexity: Sonar (1)

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 8W (89%)Overall: Claude 3.5 HaikuPerplexity: Sonar: 1W (11%)

← Claude 3.5 HaikuPerplexity: Sonar →

Claude 3.5 Haiku (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,224vs—

Coding Elo

—vs—

SWE-bench

36.2%vs—

LiveBench

44.8%vs—

GPQA Diamond

54.1%vs—

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 4WPerplexity: Sonar: 0W

Claude 3.5 Haiku (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

140 tok/svs—

Time to first token

110 msvs—

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 2WPerplexity: Sonar: 0W

Claude 3.5 Haiku (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$4/1Mvs$1/1M

Input price

$0.8/1Mvs$1/1M

Context window

200kvs127k

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 2WPerplexity: Sonar: 1W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageClaude 3.5 Haiku 5/6

Preference Elo

No shared data

Throughput Speed

No shared data

Price Efficiency

Perplexity: Sonar

$3.00/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,224

EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

44.8%

LiveBenchHigh is better

—

SWE-bench

High is better

36.2%

SWE-benchHigh is better

—

GPQA

High is better

54.1%

GPQAHigh is better

—

TTFT

Low is better

110 ms

TTFTLow is better

—

Speed

High is better

140 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

—

In $

Low is better

+25%$0.8/1M

In $Low is better

$1/1M

Out $

Low is better

$4/1M

Out $Low is better

$1/1M+300%

Context

High is better

+57%200k

ContextHigh is better

127k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 43% with Perplexity: Sonar

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude 3.5 Haiku$88.00 / mo

In: $28.00Out: $60.00

Perplexity: Sonar$50.00 / mo

In: $35.00Out: $15.00

Estimated Cost Delta

Perplexity: Sonar is estimated to save $38.00/month ($456/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Perplexity: Sonar:Pick Perplexity: Sonar when you are optimizing output cost.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatPerplexity: Sonar

Lower output list price ($1/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGClaude 3.5 Haiku

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude 3.5 Haiku

Claude 3.5 Haiku is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Perplexity: Sonar	Lower output list price ($1/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Claude 3.5 Haiku	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude 3.5 Haiku	Claude 3.5 Haiku is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-3-5-haiku-vs-sonar/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Elo 1,224

LiveBench44.8%

SWE-bench36.2%

Speed140 tok/s

Output cost$4/1M

perplexity

Perplexity: Sonar

Elo n/a

LiveBench—

SWE-bench—

Speed—

Output cost$1/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Perplexity: Sonar?: We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Perplexity: Sonar?: SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Perplexity: Sonar output tokens are $1/1M versus $4/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Perplexity: Sonar?: We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?: Claude 3.5 Haiku accepts 200k tokens versus 127k.
Can I self-host either model?: Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.5 Haiku and Perplexity: Sonar Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude 3.5 Haiku matchups →|All Perplexity: Sonar matchups →

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Claude Haiku 4.5 (next haiku)Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku Claude Opus 5 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku Claude Fable 5 vs Claude 3.5 Haiku

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Perplexity: Sonar benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.5 Haiku (8)vsPerplexity: Sonar (1)

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 8W (89%)Overall: Claude 3.5 HaikuPerplexity: Sonar: 1W (11%)

← Claude 3.5 HaikuPerplexity: Sonar →

Claude 3.5 Haiku (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,224vs—

Coding Elo

—vs—

SWE-bench

36.2%vs—

LiveBench

44.8%vs—

GPQA Diamond

54.1%vs—

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 4WPerplexity: Sonar: 0W

Claude 3.5 Haiku (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

140 tok/svs—

Time to first token

110 msvs—

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 2WPerplexity: Sonar: 0W

Claude 3.5 Haiku (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$4/1Mvs$1/1M

Input price

$0.8/1Mvs$1/1M

Context window

200kvs127k

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 2WPerplexity: Sonar: 1W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatPerplexity: Sonar

Lower output list price ($1/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGClaude 3.5 Haiku

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude 3.5 Haiku

Claude 3.5 Haiku is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Perplexity: Sonar	Lower output list price ($1/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Claude 3.5 Haiku	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude 3.5 Haiku	Claude 3.5 Haiku is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Perplexity: Sonar?

We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.

Which is better at coding, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Perplexity: Sonar?

SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Perplexity: Sonar output tokens are $1/1M versus $4/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Perplexity: Sonar?

We do not have TTFT for both models.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude 3.5 Haiku accepts 200k tokens versus 127k.

Can I self-host either model?

Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.5 Haiku and Perplexity: Sonar Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.