Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is $0.04 cheaper per 1M input tokens (44.4% lower; 1.8x difference).
API cost decision in 10 seconds
NewClaude Haiku 5.5 (batch) vs Laguna S 2.1
Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) for lower cost; pick Laguna S 2.1 only if the larger context window matters more.
Page updated:
Data confirmed:
Prices normalized to USD per 1M tokens
Sample workload: 1M input + 500K output
Budget verdict
Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) for lower cost; pick Laguna S 2.1 only if the larger context window matters more.
On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is estimated at $0.17 vs $0.18 for Laguna S 2.1, saving $0.005 (2.8% lower).
Cost-first pickClaude Haiku 5.5 (batch)
Context-first pickLaguna S 2.1
Sample savings$0.0052.8%
10x traffic gap$0.05
Laguna S 2.1 has more context, but Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) saves $0.005 on the standard workload. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $0.05. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.
Cost sensitivity
Workload Sensitivity
Cost winner changes by workload shape: input-heavy / RAG favors Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch), balanced workload favors Laguna S 2.1, and output-heavy chatbot favors Laguna S 2.1.
| Workload shape | Token mix | Better pick | Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) | Laguna S 2.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input-heavy / RAG | 5M input + 500K output | Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) | $0.38 | $0.54 |
| Balanced workload | 1M input + 1M output | Laguna S 2.1 | $0.3 | $0.27 |
| Output-heavy chatbot | 1M input + 5M output | Laguna S 2.1 | $1.3 | $0.99 |
Laguna S 2.1 is $0.07 cheaper per 1M output tokens (28% lower; 1.39x difference).
Laguna S 2.1 has 48.58K more context (1.05x larger).
Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is $0.005 cheaper on the standard workload (2.8% lower).
Estimate your workload cost
Your Workload Cost
This estimate uses normalized public API pricing per 1M tokens. It is a planning aid, not a billing quote. Verify provider pricing, limits, and terms before production use.
Quick Decision
Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) has the lower input price; Laguna S 2.1 has the lower output price; Laguna S 2.1 offers the larger context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is cheaper for the standard workload.
For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $0.17 for Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) and $0.18 for Laguna S 2.1.
Choose Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) when you care most about lower input-token price.
Choose Laguna S 2.1 when you care most about lower output-token price, and larger context window.
- On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is estimated at $0.17 vs $0.18 for Laguna S 2.1, saving $0.005 (2.8% lower).
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is $0.005 cheaper on the standard workload (2.8% lower).
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is $0.04 cheaper per 1M input tokens (44.4% lower; 1.8x difference).
- Laguna S 2.1 is $0.07 cheaper per 1M output tokens (28% lower; 1.39x difference).
- Laguna S 2.1 has 48.58K more context (1.05x larger).
| Feature | NewClaude Haiku 5.5 (batch) (Anthropic) | Laguna S 2.1 (Poolside) |
|---|---|---|
| Input Price prompt tokens per 1M | $0.05 | $0.09 |
| Completion Price per 1M tokens | $0.25 | $0.18 |
| Sample Workload Cost 1M input + 500K output | $0.17 | $0.18 |
| Context Window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Release Date |
Use-Case Decision Matrix
| Use case | Better pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Budget-constrained production | Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) | On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) is estimated at $0.17 vs $0.18 for Laguna S 2.1, saving $0.005 (2.8% lower). |
| High-volume input processing | Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) | Lower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill. |
| Long responses and chatbots | Laguna S 2.1 | Lower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens. |
| RAG or long-document work | Laguna S 2.1 | A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files. |
Related Alternatives
- Laguna S 2.1 (free) can replace Laguna S 2.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Laguna XS 2.1 (free) can replace Laguna S 2.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Laguna XS.2 (free) can replace Laguna S 2.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Laguna M.1 (free) can replace Laguna S 2.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- GPT-6 Luna Pro (batch) offers 1.05M context with $0.17 sample workload cost.
- GPT-6 Luna (batch) offers 1.05M context with $0.17 sample workload cost.
- Owl Alpha offers 1.05M context with $0 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · DeepSeek · #1
- Step 5 Preview · StepFun · #2
- GLM 5.3 Flash · Z.ai · #3
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash · Xiaomi · #4
Cheaper alternatives
Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.
Open cheapest modelsLarger context alternatives
Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.
Open largest context modelsProvider catalogs
Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.
Open provider hubsAnthropic catalog
Review all tracked Anthropic models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.
Open Anthropic modelsPoolside catalog
Check other Poolside models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.
Open Poolside modelsClaude Haiku 5.5 is Anthropic's small, fast model for high-volume, cost-sensitive work such as summarization, subagents, and browser use. It succeeds Claude Haiku 4.5 with stronger coding, computer use, and...
Laguna S 2.1 is the latest coding agent model from [Poolside](<https://poolside.ai/>). Laguna S 2.1 is a 118B total parameter model with 8B active parameters, scoring 70.2% on Terminal-Bench 2.1 and...