ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs DeepSeek-R1

Claude Haiku 4.5 comes out ahead, 58 to 51 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek-R1 is 41% cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 4.5

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI142.4
    • Price$1.00 / $5.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Haiku 4.5

  2. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-R1

    Released Jan 20, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI139.0
    • Price$0.70 / $2.60
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek-R1

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Claude Haiku 4.5 is our pick

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek-R1 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Haiku 4.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.4 · DeepSeek-R1 139.0
  • Lowest priceDeepSeek-R1DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs · DeepSeek-R1: Text
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek-R1Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek-R1
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6964
Price25%3647
Inputs & features15%8035
Context window10%3224
Overall100%58/10051/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs DeepSeek-R1 specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Haiku 4.5AnthropicDeepSeek-R1DeepSeek
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)142.4 (best)139.0
ECI rank#90 of 148 (best)#104 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions71.2%71.7% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.7% (best)53.3%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions13.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$1.00$0.70 (best)
Output$5.00$2.60 (best)
Cached input$0.10—
Blended (3:1)$2.00$1.18 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIMedian of 11 providers
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output64,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDclaude-haiku-4-5—
API providers34 (best)12
ReleasedOct 15, 2025Jan 20, 2025
Knowledge cutoffFeb 28, 2025Jul 2024
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.

  • Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
  • DeepSeek-R1$12.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek-R1?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek-R1 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek-R1?

DeepSeek-R1 is cheaper at $0.70 input / $2.60 output per million tokens (median across 11 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 $1.18 per million tokens for DeepSeek-R1 versus $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (1.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 4.5 142.4 (#90 of 148) and DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (139.5–144.3 vs 136.2–140.4), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek-R1 71.7%, Claude Haiku 4.5 71.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Haiku 4.5 66.7%, DeepSeek-R1 53.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Haiku 4.5 and DeepSeek-R1 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. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 128,000 for DeepSeek-R1. Maximum output per response: Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000, DeepSeek-R1 up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; DeepSeek-R1 accepts text. Claude Haiku 4.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek-R1 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Haiku 4.5 is the newest, released Oct 15, 2025. DeepSeek-R1 came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 2025, DeepSeek-R1 Jul 2024.

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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons