Skip to main content
AI Choice Engine

Model comparison

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs DeepSeek V3.1

Anthropic against DeepSeek, compared on context, price, and attributed benchmark results.

Claude Haiku 4.5: profile checked October 25, 2026DeepSeek V3.1: profile checked October 25, 2026Individual provider fields may changeEvidence confidence: Insufficient data — see receipts below

Anthropic

Claude Haiku 4.5

Budget

vs

DeepSeek

DeepSeek V3.1

Budget · Open weights

AI model capability comparison
SpecificationClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V3.1
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
TierBudgetBudget
Context windowWinner: 200K128K
Max output64KNot verifiedUnverified
Input / 1M tokens$1Not verifiedUnverified
Output / 1M tokens$5Not verifiedUnverified
WeightsClosedOpen
ParametersNot verifiedUnverified671B total / 37B active (MoE)
Reasoning levelsextended thinking (budget_tokens)Not verifiedUnverified
Modalitiestext, imagetext
LicenseNot verifiedUnverifiedMIT
API model idclaude-haiku-4-5-20251001Not verifiedUnverified
ReleasedOctober 15, 2025August 21, 2025
SWE-bench Verified [high] · source date Claude Haiku 4.5: 2026-02-1766.6Not verifiedUnverified
SWE-bench Verified · source date Claude Haiku 4.5: 2025-10-1573.3Not verifiedUnverified
Terminal-Bench · source date Claude Haiku 4.5: 2025-10-1540.21Not verifiedUnverified

Dates beside benchmark scores refer to the linked source’s publication or capture date unless that source explicitly states when it measured the result. A shared URL alone does not establish comparable runs; unverified setups are marked. Prices are USD per million tokens at standard rates, excluding batch and caching discounts. Values we could not confirm from the provider are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.

Benchmark receipts

Where each score comes from, and how far it can be compared across models.

Pricing tiers

Claude Haiku 4.5: Standard $1/$5 per MTok; cache reads $0.10, 5-minute writes $1.25 and 1-hour writes $2. Batch $0.50/$2.50. Context 200K and output 64K. Reliable knowledge cutoff Feb 2025; training cutoff Jul 2025. The alias claude-haiku-4-5 resolves to claude-haiku-4-5-20251001. Retirement not sooner than October 15, 2026; no definite shutdown is announced.

DeepSeek V3.1: No current first-party API or verified third-party tariff. deepseek-chat moved to V3.1-Terminus on September 22, 2025; that alias later retired July 24, 2026. MIT weights remain for self-hosting or separately priced hosts. The original checkpoint's hard output cap and selectable hosted effort menu remain unverified. Current Flash/Pro API prices do not price the original V3.1 checkpoint.

BudgetRecord checked October 25, 2026

Claude Haiku 4.5

Anthropic's earlier Haiku model for classification and extraction, retained for existing 200K-context workloads and historical evaluations.

Best for

  • High-volume classification
  • Routine extraction
  • Latency-sensitive stacks

Watch out

Active legacy, still served; the recommended Haiku 5.5 successor released October 7, 2026. Manual extended thinking uses budget_tokens rather than adaptive thinking or selectable effort. The October 15, 2026 earliest retirement commitment has passed, but no definite shutdown is announced. The convenience alias resolves to claude-haiku-4-5-20251001. Earlier models such as this do not support inference_geo; sending it errors rather than enabling US-only pricing.

BudgetOpen weightsRecord checked October 25, 2026

DeepSeek V3.1

DeepSeek V3.1 is a legacy open-weight (MIT) 671B/37B MoE with a 128K context — superseded by V3.1-Terminus, V3.2 and then V4.

Best for

  • Cost-sensitive hosted agents
  • High-volume coding assist
  • Open-weight deployments

Watch out

Legacy: DeepSeek's first-party alias moved to V3.1-Terminus on September 22, 2025. Pin the exact V3.1 checkpoint; current hosted rates depend on provider. The original card supports thinking/non-thinking templates, not a verified selectable low/high/max menu. Self-hosting memory depends on quantization, offloading and hardware. The current first-party pricing table lists Flash-1017 and Pro-0813 only; absence of a third-party tariff here means unknown, not free.

When the cheaper one wins

One of these rows is missing a verified output price, so this page will not name a cheaper winner. Run the model picker against the actual job instead of guessing.

Run the model picker

Evidence confidence: Insufficient data

How strong and complete the evidence behind this comparison is — not a prediction of which model is better. Hard limitations apply: missing pricing; evidence too sparse.

  • Pricing incomplete — No verified token pricing for DeepSeek V3.1.
  • 2/5 core specs verified on both sides — Not published for at least one side: max output, parameter count, reasoning levels.
  • No directly aligned benchmark setup — No benchmark has matching cited sources, source dates, units, effort and recorded run details on both models.
  • Verified within the last 90 days — Older of the two catalog checks was 1 day ago.
  • Both models carry source citations — Each side has at least two catalog sources on record.

Source receipts

Each catalog figure was checked against the provider or an independent second source on the date shown.

Related comparisons

Diving deeper on one model? Claude Haiku 4.5 · DeepSeek V3.1

Common questions

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs DeepSeek V3.1

Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.

Which has the larger context window, Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.1?
Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts 200K tokens against 128K for DeepSeek V3.1. This only matters if you routinely send very long documents or large codebases.
Should I use Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.1?
Both are classified in our budget tier; this editorial grouping does not imply equal capability. Claude Haiku 4.5 is a candidate for high-volume classification; DeepSeek V3.1 is a candidate for cost-sensitive hosted agents. Compare accuracy, tool reliability, latency and cost on representative tasks.
Can I self-host Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.1?
DeepSeek V3.1 publishes open weights, but self-hosting and third-party provider access depend on the licence, hardware, serving support, and availability. Claude Haiku 4.5 is a closed model whose supported access paths are controlled by its provider.

Next step

Choosing between them

The verified figures that separate this pair, computed from the catalog rather than restated boilerplate.

  • Context: Claude Haiku 4.5 takes 200K against 128K for DeepSeek V3.1 — only decisive if your prompts approach the smaller window.
  • Deployment: DeepSeek V3.1 publishes weights you can self-host; the other is API-only.
Run the model pickerEstimate stack costAll model comparisons

Choosing a harness rather than a model — Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Windsurf, or Lovable? Compare agentic harnesses · Latest releases.