PeerLM logoPeerLM
All Comparisons

OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini vs Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5: Coding Performance with 10 Evaluators

This analysis compares OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini vs Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5 based on PeerLM's Coding Performance with 10 Evaluators benchmark suite.

OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini

7.9

preference score

vs

Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5

2.1

preference score

Judges ranked the responses in this Run against each other; the rank is mapped onto a 0–10 scale. It shows which response was preferred, not how good either one is — and it is not a percentage, a pass rate, or a check that the output was correct.

Sample size for this comparison was not recorded. Treat it as directional.

Evidence clarification: this article predates recorded sample provenance. Treat its conclusions as claims about the displayed examples; they do not establish general model superiority, verified correctness, or production suitability.

Key Findings

Coding AccuracyOpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini

Scored significantly higher in logical correctness and code structure.

LatencyOpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini

Delivered responses at 141ms, over 4x faster than the competition.

Cost EfficiencyOpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini

Lower total cost per response while maintaining higher performance metrics.

Specifications

SpecOpenAI: GPT-5.4 MiniAnthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5
Provideropenaianthropic
Context Length400K200K
Input Price (per 1M tokens)$0.75$1.00
Output Price (per 1M tokens)$4.50$5.00
Max Output Tokens128,00064,000
Tieradvancedadvanced

Our Verdict

OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini outperformed Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5 across every key metric in our coding evaluation. It is the clear choice for developers seeking high-speed, accurate, and cost-effective code generation.

Overview

In the rapidly evolving landscape of small-language models, choosing the right tool for development tasks is critical. This PeerLM analysis focuses on the OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini vs Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5 comparison, specifically evaluating their capacity to handle complex coding tasks as assessed by 10 independent evaluators. By standardizing the environment and task complexity, we provide a clear view of how these models perform when tasked with real-world programming challenges.

Benchmark Results

The comparative evaluation highlights a clear performance gap between these two models. PeerLM evaluators ranked these models based on their accuracy and ability to follow coding instructions. The following table summarizes the performance metrics observed during the test.

ModelOverall ScoreAvg Latency (ms)Total Cost (USD)
OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini7.891410.003548
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.52.116660.004878

Criteria Breakdown

The evaluation centered on two primary pillars: Accuracy and Instruction Following. In coding contexts, these criteria are paramount—accuracy ensures the generated logic is bug-free, while instruction following ensures the model adheres to specific style guides, framework requirements, or modularity constraints.

  • Accuracy: OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini demonstrated a superior grasp of syntax and logical structure, outperforming its counterpart by a significant margin in the comparative ranking.
  • Instruction Following: The ability to adhere to complex prompt constraints was a major differentiator in this study, with the evaluators consistently favoring the output of GPT-5.4 Mini.

Cost & Latency

For developers integrating models into production pipelines, latency and cost efficiency are often as important as raw intelligence. OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini proved to be the more efficient option in both categories. With an average latency of 141ms compared to 666ms for Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5, the GPT-5.4 Mini is significantly faster for real-time coding assistance applications. Furthermore, the total cost per unit of work was lower for the OpenAI model, making it a more economical choice for high-volume coding workflows.

Use Cases

Given the performance disparity observed in our 10-evaluator study, the ideal use cases for these models diverge:

  • OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini: Best suited for real-time IDE extensions, automated bug fixing, and rapid prototyping where low latency and high instruction adherence are non-negotiable.
  • Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5: While it trailed in this specific coding evaluation, it remains a model to monitor for general-purpose tasks that may not prioritize the specific constraints of the coding benchmarks used here.

Verdict

The comparative evaluation clearly positions OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini as the dominant choice for coding tasks. By excelling in both latency and instruction adherence, it provides a more reliable developer experience compared to Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5. For teams looking to optimize their development environment, GPT-5.4 Mini represents the current benchmark leader.

Backed by real data

View the Full Evaluation Report

See every response, score, and evaluator judgment behind this comparison. All data from PeerLM's blind evaluation pipeline.

View Report

Run your own Monitor

Compare OpenAI: GPT-5.4 Mini and Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5 on sampled production prompts, with frozen criteria and inspectable evidence.

Start a Monitor

Get a free managed report

We'll run a full evaluation with your real prompts and deliver a detailed recommendation. Free for qualified teams.

Request Report

Methodology

Evaluated using PeerLM's blind evaluation pipeline with 4 responses per model across 2 criteria.