Hacker News Reader

Comment by system2 | Hacker News Reader

Who in their right mind would use haiku while Mimo or GLM cost 10% of what they are charging with much smarter models?

That's not what any benchmarks that look at cost per task or similar says in terms of cost. The Chinese models, generally speaking, might be cheaper per token but need a lot more tokens to get there.

Except for the new MiMo V2.6 models, which appear to give some of the best value right now, at least on paper. (I haven't tried them so I can't speak from experience.)

Some people/organizations are ideologically opposed to using Chinese models. Not me, I use GLM-5.3-Flash for almost everything (the subscription-subsidized pricing on a legacy Z.ai plan makes it the best value model by a wide margin), along with some MiMo and DeepSeek. Still, I use Luna for certain tasks where speed is more valuable than performance; I can see this new Haiku displacing Luna for those. If you mean Haiku 4.5 though I agree, that model was a waste of time and money.

Luna is not really the fastest. You need to use it in high/max to get the good output for what it is good for: summarizing. And that is already close to two minutes per task...

I’m on the Legacy v2 plan and same: nothing comes close to 5.3 Flash’s value on it. It’s crazy, no wonder they discontinued them!

There's also fomo and what I believe is faniticism.

Even for simple tasks why use X if I know "Y Max" is available and on paper, better?

And why use something else when your favorite company releases something. Surely it must always be the best one to use.

z.ai speed has been horrific, worse than sol-6.1 was last week, I am not renewing my sub once it expires.

Isn't the point of this release that it's comparable?

AAI Index // Input // Output

Haiku 5.5: 43 // $0.10 // $0.50

Mimo 2.6 Pro: 46 // $0.43 // $0.87

Mimo 2.6 Flash: 38 // $0.10 // $0.28

Seems competitive to me? Plus then I don't have to manage multiple providers

Presumably everyone who doesn't bother integrating a third party API key into their harness, which would probably be most of the Claude Code users.

On subscription pricing a $20 Anthropic subscription gives >$500 equivalent tokens, which is not so different, and you get smarter models. API pricing has decent margins.

And Opus 5.5 is really good.

Where do you get this 10% number? Checking providers I know/respect, and GLM 5.3 flash is $0.15/m. Haiku is $0.10/m.

They say it in the announcement: Haiku is basically useful to be called as a subagent. So you use Opus, and you want to investigate your production logs, instead of throwing them right away which is going to use a massive amount of token for mostly noise data, Opus asks Haiku to determine patterns to extract only the relevant logs and feed it back in Opus. The models are meant to be used together.

> The models are meant to be used together.

If that was the case, then Claude Code would use smaller models for subagents. It doesn't. The subagent always inherits the parent model unless you tell it specifically not to.

Well, unless you're using OpenCode Go, it's per-token costs (even if already super low), while Haiku falls under the Claude sub. It's just more straight forward and you aren't feeling a "loss" with the sub.

There really aren't any models at 10% of the price of Luna or Haiku.

People who are stuck using Bedrock in-geo due to their company policy (me).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com