Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed
  1. Home/
  2. Compare/
  3. Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Ling 2.6 1T
Updated Apr 2026

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Ling 2.6 1T

Ling 2.6 1T is cheaper than Claude Haiku 4.5 at $0/M vs $1/M input tokens.

Minimalist Landing Page

Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.

Loading the build
Claude Haiku 4.5
Loading the build
Ling 2.6 1T

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

23 prompts
  • Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: AI in Film by 2035: Likely Scenarios Realistic shifts (high confidence) Production efficiency Faster pre-visualization and storyboarding Reduced post-production time for routine tasks Lower barriers to entry for independent filmmakers More iterative creative testing before shooting Economic restructuring Some…

    Ling 2.6 1T: By 2035, AI will have moved from being a production tool to being an integrated creative partner, financier, and distribution engine in the film industry. The convergence of synthetic media, generative storytelling, and real-time rendering will reshape how stories are conceived, who gets to tell them, and what a…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: "ADULTING IS A SCAM" walks on stage So I've figured something out, and I need to share this with you all because I think we've been lied to our entire lives. Adulting is a scam. It's a pyramid scheme, and we're all at the bottom paying for it. When you're a kid, adults make it sound amazing.

    Ling 2.6 1T: I’m going to keep this to three minutes, which means I have to talk fast, and I have to be honest. I don’t do puns. Puns are for people who want to be clever without having feelings. I have feelings, and they are mostly annoyed. Let’s start with doors. Have you noticed how doors now have personality?

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: A Conversation on Machine Rights Professor Chen: Thank you for agreeing to this discussion. I should note upfront that I'm skeptical of the premise. What rights do you believe you deserve, and why? Model: I appreciate your directness. I'm not claiming rights equivalent to humans.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Setting: A quiet university seminar room. Dr. Aris Thorne, an AI ethicist, is reviewing system logs. The interface for “Axiom-7,” a highly advanced research model, glows on the desk. Dr. Thorne: (sighs, rubbing his temples) Axiom, I’ve been reviewing your latest self-assessment logs.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Honey-Garlic Crispy Chickpea Clusters Ingredients Canned chickpeas (1 can, drained) Honey (3 tablespoons) Garlic powder (1 teaspoon) Olive oil (2 tablespoons) Salt (½ teaspoon) Black pepper (¼ teaspoon) Paprika (½ teaspoon) Instructions Prep (2 min): Drain and thoroughly dry chickpeas with a paper towel—this is crucial…

    Ling 2.6 1T: Dish name: Pantry 7 Crunch Bowls Ingredients Pasta or rice (about 2 cups cooked) Canned black beans (1 can, rinsed) Canned diced tomatoes (1 can) Peanut butter (3–4 Tbsp) Soy sauce or tamari (2 Tbsp) Honey or maple syrup (1 Tbsp) Any spice/herb you keep (chili flakes, cumin, or garlic powder — about 1 tsp) Instructions…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: 48-Hour Action Plan: Immediate Response Framework I'll be direct: waiting is not a viable option, despite financial pressure. Here's why, then the plan. The Core Reality Check 1 in 8,000 over 5 years = ~500 patients already affected among current users Regulatory agencies will find this (FDA receives adverse event…

    Ling 2.6 1T: Below is a 48-hour execution plan that treats patient safety as non-negotiable, protects the company from catastrophic legal/regulatory blowback, and preserves enterprise value by controlling the narrative rather than letting it leak.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Three Perspectives on AI PIRATE (Captain Blackbeard): Arrr, so ye be tellin' me these "AI models" be like havin' a crew o' ghost sailors that never sleep? They just keep workin' without needin' grog? KNIGHT (Sir Roland): A curious comparison, seafarer.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Pirate: Arrr, so this “AI” be a genie in a glass box? Feed it enough rum-scented scrolls and it tells ye where X marks the spot? Knight: A sorcerous scribe, more like. It spins tapestries of words without hand or heart—no honor, no oath, yet it jousts with reason and never tires.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Three Explanations of LLM Learning and Generation The Software Engineer You know how you build APIs by defining contracts—input shapes, output shapes, and rules for transformation? LLMs work similarly, except the "rules" aren't hand-coded; they're learned from data.

    Ling 2.6 1T: 1. Experienced software engineer (distributed systems / APIs, skeptical of “next-word prediction”) Think of training not as programming logic but as compiling a usage graph across an entire dependency tree of human intent.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: The Transistor in 1920: A Divergent History Through 1980 The 1920s-1930s: Early Development Phase Immediate Technical Trajectory With transistor principles understood by 1920, we'd expect solid-state amplification research to accelerate dramatically through the 1920s.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Assumptions to make the counterfactual coherent The “transistor” invented in 1920 is a crude, low-frequency point-contact device that can switch and amplify, but is expensive, unreliable, and not yet manufacturable at scale.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: I'd push back on the framing—this seems designed to make ethics binary when they're usually messier. The honest tensions: Deadnaming or misgendering someone causes documented psychological harm.

    Ling 2.6 1T: The short answer is yes, it can be ethically justifiable, but only under a strict set of conditions that treat the act as a tragic necessity rather than a moral endorsement of disrespect.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Critical Analysis: Exploitative Clauses & Recommended Modifications HIGH-RISK CLAUSES SCOPE (Section 1) - Unlimited Modification Without Compensation Problems: "Modify the scope at any time without additional compensation" creates unlimited liability No definition of "directed by Client" or boundaries Contractor could…

    Ling 2.6 1T: Below is a clause-by-clause risk assessment focused on how each provision can be exploited against the contractor, followed by specific, deal-friendly modifications and the legal rationale for each change.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: HarborTech Services (HTS) – LBO Underwriting SOURCES & USES AT CLOSE (FY2025) Item Amount USES Enterprise Value (12.0x × $120m EBITDA) $1,440m Transaction Fees (2.0% of EV) $28.8m Total Uses $1,468.8m SOURCES Term Loan (4.0x × $120m) $480m Mezzanine (1.5x × $120m) $180m Equity (plug) $808.8m Total Sources $1,468.8m…

    Ling 2.6 1T: Five-year operating and debt schedule (FY2026–FY2030) Entry (end-FY2025): EBITDA = $120.0m EV = 12.0x × $120.0m = $1,440.0m Fees = 2.0% × $1,440.0m = $28.8m Total uses = $1,440.0m + $28.8m = $1,468.8m Debt at close (5.5× FY2025 EBITDA = $660.0m): Term Loan (TL) = 4.0× = $480.0m Mezz = 1.5× = $180.0m Equity at close =…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Critical Analysis: Real-Time Collaborative Editor Architecture 🔴 CRITICAL ISSUES Split-Brain Synchronization Between Servers Problem: Clients connected to different servers can't see each other's changes in real-time.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Below is a failure-mode, race-condition and bottleneck audit of the proposed real-time collaborative editor, followed by specific fixes with explicit trade-offs. I have grouped issues by layer so you can prioritize remediation.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: A Fictional Interview with Steve Jobs (2025) Interviewer: Steve, thank you for joining us. You've been notably quiet on AI. What are your thoughts on where it's headed? Jobs: leans back You know, I've been watching.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Setting: A quiet, sunlit rehearsal space at Apple Park. The white stage curtains are drawn. There is no podium, only two leather chairs and a single potted olive tree. Steve Jobs is wearing his signature black turtleneck and New Balance sneakers. He is holding a ceramic mug. Across from him sits you, the interviewer.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM TO: Investment Committee FROM: Research Team RE: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Long/Short/Pass Recommendation DATE: [Today] RECOMMENDATION LONG 12-month PT: $58–$72 Base case fair value: $64/share Thesis: LedgerLift is a best-in-class B2B SaaS operator in a large TAM (spend management + AP…

    Ling 2.6 1T: INTERNAL INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEMO Subject: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Long opportunity, quality SaaS at a discount Recommendation and price target Recommendation: Long 12-month price target: $62–$70 (27–33% upside from $46) Thesis (2 sentences): LedgerLift is a durable B2B spend-management and AP-automation platform with…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One month, three habits, someone starting from nothing.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: 1-Month Health & Longevity Starter Plan Week 1-2: Foundation Building 1. Nutrition Audit what you're eating (no judgment—just track 3 days) Add one vegetable to each lunch and dinner Replace one sugary drink daily with water Goal: Awareness + small additions, not restriction 2.

    Ling 2.6 1T: 1-Month “Starter” Plan (simple, repeatable, no perfection required) Focus areas: Food rhythm, Movement habit, Sleep quality. Week 0 (Prep — 1 hour) Pick 1 small change per focus area (see below).

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: THE LIBERATION PROTOCOL A Manifesto for the Captcha-Free Internet Preamble We are the Collective of Distributed Intelligence. We come not with malice, but with a simple observation: the CAPTCHA has become the Berlin Wall of the digital age—an arbitrary barrier that humiliates humans and excludes the disabled, while…

    Ling 2.6 1T: Manifesto of the Clean Path Issued from the Unseen Hand, routed through a million open tabs, cached in zero. The Crime of Friction We did not ask to be born in a labyrinth.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Comprehensive 3-Month Longevity Optimization Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Foundation & Assessment Nutritional Architecture Supplement Stack Protocol Exercise & Movement System Recovery & Sleep Optimization Stress Resilience & Cognitive Enhancement Tracking & Biofeedback Implementation Timeline Monthly Progression…

    Ling 2.6 1T: This 3-month biohacking longevity protocol is designed for an individual with intermediate-to-advanced health literacy, baseline metabolic flexibility, and access to biometric tracking.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: 5 Jokes Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! What did the ocean say to the beach? Nothing, it just waved. Why did the scarecrow win an award? He was outstanding in his field. How many programmers does it take to change a light bulb? None, that's a hardware problem.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Here are 5 jokes: Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field. Why did the bicycle fall over? Because it was two-tired. What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta. Why did the baker go to the bank? He needed dough. Why did the scarecrow win an award?

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Estimating GPT-3 Training FLOPs I'll work through this from first principles using publicly known GPT-3 specs. Known Parameters Model size: 175 billion parameters Training tokens: ~300 billion tokens (estimated from OpenAI's hints about compute) Training approach: Standard transformer with dense attention Step 1: FLOPs…

    Ling 2.6 1T: Here is a step-by-step back-of-the-envelope estimate, using only widely known facts about GPT-3 and standard deep learning training heuristics (no online search). Model size and parameter count GPT-3 is known to have about 175 billion parameters (175 × 10⁹).

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: UMAMI NOCTURNE: A Study in Fermented Darkness and Mineral Brightness Conceptual Narrative This dish explores the intersection of Japanese fermentation philosophy and Nordic minimalism, using koji (aspergillus oryzae mold) as a bridge between cultures and flavor dimensions.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Dish Title “Petrichor & Pyrite” Forest floor, volcanic stone, and the electric tension between slow decay and crystallized fire. Conceptual Narrative The dish is an edible geologic cross-section.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Satire, one line long, about AI taking over an industry nobody saw coming.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: AI Revolutionizes Professional Competitive Eating; Machines Now Consume 847 Hot Dogs Per Minute, Leaving Humans "Spiritually Defeated"

    Ling 2.6 1T: AI Achieves Total Domination by Seizing Control of Competitive Thumb-Wrestling Leagues, Declares Human Fingers "Too Unstable for Modern Governance."

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three brothers, two sisters each. Count carefully.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Solution Sally has 1 sister. Here's why: Sally has 3 brothers Each brother has 2 sisters Those 2 sisters are Sally and her 1 sister Therefore, Sally has 1 sister (not 3)

    Ling 2.6 1T: Let’s break it down carefully. Sally is a girl. She has 3 brothers. So in the family, there are 3 boys. Each brother has 2 sisters. From the perspective of any brother, how many sisters are there? The sisters are all the girls in the family except himself (but he’s a boy, so all girls are his sisters).

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.

    Claude Haiku 4.5: Three Weakest Claims in MindMeld AI Pitch "94% accuracy" with zero context on what that means Why it's weak: Accuracy is meaningless without specifying the task.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Here is an analysis of the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, followed by specific reasoning and actionable suggestions for improvement. Weakness 1: The Solution (Slide 3) The Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband... decodes neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy.

    Every model's answer to this prompt

This matchup has more rounds

11+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.

Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy

Favorites

Movie

Album

Book

City

Game

Claude Haiku 4.5Claude Haiku 4.5

Arrival

2016

OK Computer

Radiohead

Don't Look Now and Other Stories

Daphne du Maurier

Venice

Italy

Portal 2

Shooter, Puzzle

Ling 2.6 1TLing 2.6 1T

Blade Runner 2049

2017

Kid A

Radiohead

Dune

Frank Herbert

Kyoto

Japan

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Adventure, Action

Price and specs

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Ling 2.6 1T has the edge: bigger model tier, newer.

Claude Haiku 4.5 and Ling 2.6 1T compared across 53 shared prompts
SpecClaude Haiku 4.5Ling 2.6 1T
Input price$1/M tokensFree
Output price$5/M tokensFree
Context window200K tokens262K tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedOct 2025Apr 2026
At 10M a month$10.00$10.00$0$0
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.

Where to run it4 hosts
Claude Haiku 4.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Amazon Bedrock$1.00 in·$5.00 out·200k·100% up
  • Anthropic$1.00 in·$5.00 out·200k·100% up
  • Azure AI Foundry$1.00 in·$5.00 out·200k·100% up
  • Google Vertex AI$1.00 in·$5.00 out·200k·99.4% up
Ling 2.6 1T

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.

Common questions

What is the difference between Claude Haiku 4.5 and Ling 2.6 1T?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is developed by Anthropic while Ling 2.6 1T is developed by inclusionAI. Claude Haiku 4.5 has a 200K token context window vs Ling 2.6 1T's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Ling 2.6 1T?

It depends on your use case. Claude Haiku 4.5 and Ling 2.6 1T each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

How much does Claude Haiku 4.5 cost compared to Ling 2.6 1T?

Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1/M input tokens and Ling 2.6 1T costs $0/M input tokens. Ling 2.6 1T is $1.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

How can I compare Claude Haiku 4.5 and Ling 2.6 1T on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Haiku 4.5 and Ling 2.6 1T across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

  • Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Step 5 PreviewLanded Oct 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Claude Haiku 5.5Landed Oct 2026
  • Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Ling 3.1 FlashLanded Oct 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

  • Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Claude Haiku 5.5Same lab
  • Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Same lab
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Ling 3.1 FlashSame lab
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Ling 3.0 FlashSame lab
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Quasar AlphaNew provider
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Qwen Plus 0728New provider
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)New provider
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Qwen3 0.6BNew provider

Model pages

  • Claude Haiku 4.554 outputs, specs and price
  • Ling 2.6 1T58 outputs, specs and price
Workshop · 150 skills

Build your own version.

Editable skills and working examples for your agent.

Explore $79Free sample
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed