# Claude Haiku 5.5 in BrainBox: benchmarks, pricing and when to use it

> Anthropic released Claude Haiku 5.5 on October 7, 2026 and it is already selectable in the BrainBox Assistant: one of the top scores in its price range on Artificial Analysis, with benchmarks, intelligence units per task and when to pick it over GPT-6 Luna.

- Source: https://www.usebrainbox.com/en/blog/claude-haiku-5-5-in-brainbox-benchmarks-pricing-and-when-to-use-it
- Author: BrainBox Team
- Published: 2026-10-07
- Language: en
- Tags: models, Anthropic, product

## Summary

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the small model Anthropic released on October 7, 2026, and it can already be selected in the BrainBox Assistant, in the Default category, with a one million token context window and image input. Artificial Analysis scores it 43 on its Intelligence Index at max effort, five points above GPT-6 Luna. In BrainBox a cited question uses about 1 intelligence unit and a case file review about 4, against roughly 12 with Claude 4.5 Haiku. It suits frequent questions, summaries and batch work.

---
Claude Haiku 5.5 has been selectable in the BrainBox Assistant since October 7, 2026, the day [Anthropic released it](https://www.anthropic.com/claude-haiku-5-5). It appears in the Default category of the picker with a [one million token context window](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/models/haiku-5-5/overview), 128,000 max output tokens and image input. It succeeds Claude 4.5 Haiku, which stays available, and in BrainBox uses about a third of its intelligence units on the same task.

> **Remember**
>
> Haiku 5.5 costs the same as GPT-6 Luna on short questions and scores five points higher on the Artificial Analysis index. For everyday document work, it is a good default.

## What is Claude Haiku 5.5 and what improved over Claude 4.5 Haiku?

It is Anthropic's small model for high-volume work. Anthropic calls it ["the cheapest, fastest, and most capable small model we've ever released"](https://www.anthropic.com/claude-haiku-5-5) and recommends it for summaries, classification, database queries, live customer support and as a subagent for Opus 5.5. The [official model page](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/models/haiku-5-5/overview) lists it as the fastest in the family, with adaptive thinking and a June 2026 knowledge cutoff.

It is also the first Haiku with an adjustable effort level: more effort means more reasoning and more usage. In Anthropic's own benchmarks the jump over Haiku 4.5 is large:

| Benchmark, per Anthropic | Haiku 4.5 | Haiku 5.5 | GPT-6 Luna | Sonnet 5.5, reference |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| GDPval-AA v2.1, knowledge work | 735 | 1620 | 1437 | **1840** |
| OSWorld 2.1, computer use | 15.7% | 72.4% | 48.9% | **83.9%** |
| Humanity's Last Exam, no tools | 10.2% | 45.9% | | **56.9%** |
| Humanity's Last Exam, with tools | 18.7% | 57.4% | | **64.5%** |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | 0.0% | 39.2% | 16.4% | **70.6%** |
| FrontierCode 1.1 Main | | 46.4% | 42.4% | **52.1%** |
| Chartography no tools, visual reasoning | 6.4% | 46.4% | 29.1% | **61.6%** |

The best score in each row is in bold.

Anthropic includes Sonnet 5.5 as a reference, and it wins every row, as you would expect from a larger model. Sonnet 5.5 is not in the BrainBox picker today. The comparison that matters here is GPT-6 Luna, which costs the same on short questions, and Haiku 5.5 beats it on every row with data. Luna's numbers are reported by Anthropic, not OpenAI.

Independent measurement points the same way. [Artificial Analysis](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-haiku-5-5) gives it 43 on its Intelligence Index at max effort, [38 at high effort](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-haiku-5-5-high) and [34 at medium effort](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-haiku-5-5-medium), against a median of 13 in its price range. GPT-6 Luna [scores 38](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gpt-6-luna) and Claude Opus 5.5 scores 58.

> **The score depends on effort**
>
> The 43 comes from max effort, where Artificial Analysis counts 440 million output tokens across the whole index and rates the model very verbose. At medium effort the score drops to 34 and the model becomes concise. In the Assistant the model decides how much to reason at each step, so real results land somewhere between those two.

## How does the BrainBox Assistant work with Haiku 5.5?

The BrainBox Assistant is an agent. You choose which Boxes and files it can use and which model does the reasoning; the agent decides the steps. Each one shows up in the chat: "Listing sources", "Searching documents", "Reading document" with the pages it opened, "Saving note" when it sets something aside, and finally the answer with page citations.

Most of what the agent does is short, repeated steps: search, read a few pages, summarize, cite. Haiku 5.5 is built for that. [Box](https://www.anthropic.com/claude-haiku-5-5) reports that in early testing it scored 11 points higher than Haiku 4.5 at about half the latency.

  - **Open the Assistant and pick your sources** In the sidebar you check the Boxes and files the agent can use. You can also point to a file with @ inside the message.
  - **Click the model picker** It sits in the bottom bar of the chat. A searchable list opens.
  - **Type 'Haiku'** Claude Haiku 5.5 and Claude 4.5 Haiku appear, with their context window and the Images label.
  - **Choose Claude Haiku 5.5** If you cannot see it, the workspace model policy does not allow it.
  - **Ask for the task** Page citations, tools and the agent's visible steps work the same with any model.

*Simulation of the BrainBox Assistant model picker with Claude Haiku 5.5 selected.*

BrainBox is an AI workspace for documents that answers with citations to the exact page. A smaller model reasons in fewer steps, and every citation still leads to its page.

## How many intelligence units does Haiku 5.5 use per task?

In BrainBox, usage is measured in intelligence units, not tokens, and each task uses a different amount depending on how many searches and page reads the agent runs, how much the model reasons and how much it writes. Estimates for the standard plan:

| Task in the Assistant | Haiku 5.5 | Claude 4.5 Haiku | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single cited question, one or two searches | ≈ 1 unit | ≈ 2 units | ≈ 1 unit |
| Excel analysis with the code interpreter | ≈ 2 units | ≈ 5 units | ≈ 2 units |
| Case file review with about ten searches and page reads | ≈ 4 units | ≈ 12 units | ≈ 4 units |
| Full read of a 200-page contract, page by page | ≈ 5 units | ≈ 13 units | ≈ 3 units |
| PDF report from a case file, with code and about fifteen steps | ≈ 7 units | ≈ 21 units | ≈ 5 units |

These are estimates: a longer answer, more sources or more agent steps push the number up. On short tasks Haiku 5.5 and Luna use about the same; on tasks that pile up many pages read, Haiku 5.5 climbs a bit more. For reference, the Elite plan includes 400 units a month, enough for about a hundred case file reviews with Haiku 5.5.

## Which tasks is it worth choosing for?

| Task in the Assistant | Haiku 5.5? | Alternative |
|---|---|---|
| Single cited question | Yes, it uses the minimum | [GPT-6 Luna](/en/blog/gpt-6-sol-vs-luna-benchmarks-pricing-which-to-use-in-brainbox) |
| [Asking AI across several case files at once](/en/blog/ask-ai-across-multiple-case-files-at-once) | Yes, it chains short searches cheaply | GPT-6 Sol when a lot of information has to be cross-checked |
| Batch summaries or document classification | Yes, it is the main use case | GPT-6 Luna |
| [Analyzing an Excel file](/en/blog/analyze-excel-with-ai-without-coding) with the code interpreter | Yes, for routine tables and charts | GPT-6 Sol for complex financial models |
| Legal opinion or review where a mistake is expensive | Not its strength | [Claude Opus 5.5](/en/blog/claude-opus-5-5-in-brainbox-benchmarks-pricing-and-when-to-use-it) |
| Questions about screenshots, charts or diagrams | Yes, it accepts images | Any other model with the Images label |

A [compliance team](/en/solutions/compliance) can keep Haiku 5.5 as the everyday model and enable Opus 5.5 only for final reviews, from the workspace model policy. Citations point to the page with either one, so [verifying the answer](/en/blog/how-to-verify-an-ai-answer-about-your-documents) works the same.

## What about safety?

Anthropic reports that Haiku 5.5 [improves on Haiku 4.5 across almost all of its alignment evaluations](https://www.anthropic.com/claude-haiku-5-5), with far fewer cases of misaligned behavior and less willingness to cooperate with misuse. These are the company's own evaluations, described in its [system card](https://www.anthropic.com/document/claude-haiku-5-5-system-card). In the Assistant, the practical protection is the same as before: the agent asks for approval before sensitive actions on your files, and every claim carries its citation.

HubSpot says Haiku 5.5 scored 92.8% on its internal test suite, averaged over three runs, the best result it has seen on that suite.

## Sources

- Anthropic, [Introducing Claude Haiku 5.5](https://www.anthropic.com/claude-haiku-5-5): October 7, 2026 announcement, benchmark table, cost against Haiku 4.5, effort level, alignment and customer quotes.
- Anthropic, [Claude Haiku 5.5 model page](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/models/haiku-5-5/overview): one million token context, max output, adaptive thinking, modalities and knowledge cutoff.
- Anthropic, [Claude Haiku 5.5 system card](https://www.anthropic.com/document/claude-haiku-5-5-system-card): methodology of the safety evaluations.
- Artificial Analysis, Claude Haiku 5.5 pages at [max](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-haiku-5-5), [high](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-haiku-5-5-high) and [medium](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-haiku-5-5-medium) effort: Intelligence Index, price-range median, output tokens and verbosity.
- Artificial Analysis, [GPT-6 Luna page](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gpt-6-luna): reference score on the same index.

## FAQ

### What changed between Claude 4.5 Haiku and Haiku 5.5?

According to Anthropic, Haiku 5.5 is the cheapest, fastest and most capable small model it has released. It is the first Haiku with an adjustable effort level, the context window grows from 200,000 to one million tokens, and in Anthropic's benchmarks it goes from 15.7% to 72.4% on OSWorld 2.1 and from 10.2% to 45.9% on Humanity's Last Exam without tools. Anthropic estimates it costs about 75% less to run than Haiku 4.5 on average. In BrainBox a case file review drops from about 12 intelligence units to about 4.

### How much does Haiku 5.5 cost in BrainBox?

Usage is measured in intelligence units, not tokens. Estimates on the standard plan: a single cited question, about 1 unit; a data analysis with the code interpreter, about 2; a case file review with searches and page reads, about 4; a PDF report built from a case file, about 7. It is one of the cheapest models in the picker.

### Which plans include it?

Haiku 5.5 sits in the Default category of the picker, the same as GPT-6 Luna. In a workspace, availability depends on the model policy the admin has set. If you cannot see it, check the workspace AI policy.

### Is it better than GPT-6 Luna?

On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Haiku 5.5 at max effort scores 43 against 38 for Luna. In the benchmarks Anthropic publishes, Haiku 5.5 beats Luna on every row with data for both, for example 72.4% against 48.9% on OSWorld 2.1. In BrainBox they use about the same units on short questions; on long tasks that read many pages, Haiku 5.5 uses a bit more.

### Can I use Haiku 5.5 for a legal opinion or a critical review?

You can, and page citations work the same, but it is not what the model is best at. For work where a mistake is expensive, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 58 on the same index. A sensible pattern is to handle daily work with Haiku 5.5 and switch to Opus 5.5 for the final review; changing the model in the picker does not reset the chat.

### Is Claude 4.5 Haiku still available?

Yes. Claude 4.5 Haiku stays in the picker. Chats that were already using it do not switch models on their own.