ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 66 to 57 and 53 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek R1 0528

    Released May 28, 2025

    53/100
    • ECI141.2
    • Price$0.512 / $2.19
    • Context164K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek R1 0528

  2. Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 4.5

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    57/100
    • ECI142.2
    • Price$1.00 / $5.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 4.5
  3. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    66/100
    • ECI140.6
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (57) and DeepSeek R1 0528 (53). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Haiku 4.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.2 · DeepSeek R1 0528 141.2 · Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 · DeepSeek R1 0528 $0.932 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 · DeepSeek R1 0528 163,840 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashDeepSeek R1 0528: Text · Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek R1 0528Publishes downloadable weights (MIT)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek R1 0528Claude Haiku 4.5Gemini 2.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%666765
Price25%493451
Inputs & features15%3580100
Context window10%283261
Overall100%53/10057/10066/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek R1 0528DeepSeekClaude Haiku 4.5AnthropicGemini 2.5 FlashGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)141.2142.2 (best)140.6
ECI rank#108 of 165#102 of 165 (best)#110 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions76.3% (best)71.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.4%66.7% (best)—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—13.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.512$1.00$0.30 (best)
Output$2.19 (best)$5.00$2.50
Cached input—$0.10$0.03 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.932$2.00$0.85 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 16 providersOfficial Anthropic APIOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window163,840 tokens200,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens64,000 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoYesYes
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenMITProprietaryProprietary
API model ID—claude-haiku-4-5gemini-2.5-flash
API providers1648 (best)32
ReleasedMay 28, 2025Oct 15, 2025Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Feb 28, 2025Jan 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • DeepSeek R1 0528$9.50
  • Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek R1 0528, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (57) and DeepSeek R1 0528 (53). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek R1 0528, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0.512 input / $2.19 output per million tokens (median across 16 API providers); Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.85 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash versus $0.932 for DeepSeek R1 0528 (1.1× as much) and $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (2.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.2 (#102 of 165), DeepSeek R1 0528 141.2 (#108 of 165) and Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6 (#110 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (139.4–143.9 vs 139.0–142.9), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek R1 0528, Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemini 2.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Haiku 4.5 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 163,840 for DeepSeek R1 0528. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek R1 0528 up to 32,768, Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek R1 0528 accepts text; Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek R1 0528 publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 4.5 and Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the newest, released Oct 15, 2025. Gemini 2.5 Flash came out Jun 17, 2025; DeepSeek R1 0528 came out May 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 2025, Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons