{"id":19049,"date":"2026-09-09T06:10:02","date_gmt":"2026-09-09T10:10:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp.glbgpt.com\/?p=19049"},"modified":"2026-09-09T06:10:03","modified_gmt":"2026-09-09T10:10:03","slug":"claude-haiku-vs-sonnet-vs-opus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wp.glbgpt.com\/nl\/hub\/claude-haiku-vs-sonnet-vs-opus","title":{"rendered":"Vergelijking van Claude-modellen: Haiku vs Sonnet vs Opus, en waar Fable in dit rijtje past"},"content":{"rendered":"

A practical 2026 guide to choosing by speed, API cost, context, task complexity, and the cost of a wrong answer.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For most everyday writing, analysis, coding, and tool-using work, start with Claude Sonnet 5. Choose Haiku 4.5 when low latency and high volume matter more than handling difficult edge cases. Choose Opus 5 when the task is complex, hard to verify, or expensive to get wrong. Fable 5.1 sits above Opus as a specialist escalation path, not the default.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those recommendations are for general mixed workloads. Anthropic’s production guidance says most workloads should start with Opus 5, while its own task matrix separately positions Sonnet for everyday speed-and-capability work. The right starting point therefore depends on your risk tolerance and evaluation process, not just the model name. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

GlobalGPT makes the broader workflow<\/strong> practical with one affordable subscription: Claude, GPT-5.6 Sol, Gemini 3 Pro, Kimi K3, and multiple AI functions share one dashboard for research, writing, analysis, coding, and refinement. Its CLI can also bring that model access into your terminal, development workflow, and existing production tools. Comparing outputs is one useful part of the workflow; for the broader family-level choice, see our Vergelijking tussen ChatGPT, Claude en Gemini<\/a>. The rest of this guide focuses on choosing within Claude.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n
Probeer de GPT-serie op de GlobalGPT<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n