ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Kimi K3 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017

Claude Haiku 5.5 comes out ahead, 83 to 79 and 65 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Anthropic

    Claude Haiku 5.5

    Released Oct 7, 2026New

    83/100
    • ECI160.4
    • Price$0.10 / $0.50
    • Context1M
  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K3

    Released Jul 16, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI158.3
    • Price$3.00 / $15.00
    • Context1.05M
  3. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017

    Released Oct 17, 2026New

    79/100
    • ECI158.8
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context1M
01 — Verdict

Claude Haiku 5.5 is our pick

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (79) and Kimi K3 (65). It leads on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Haiku 5.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 5.5 160.4 · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 158.8 · Kimi K3 158.3
  • Lowest priceClaude Haiku 5.5Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.20 · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 $0.263 · Kimi K3 $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextKimi K3Kimi K3 1,048,576 · Claude Haiku 5.5 1,000,000 · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Haiku 5.5 and Kimi K3Claude Haiku 5.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Kimi K3: Text, Images, Video · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingKimi K3 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Publishes downloadable weights (MIT)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Haiku 5.5Kimi K3DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%898787
Price25%801274
Inputs & features15%808070
Context window10%606160
Overall100%83/10065/10079/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Kimi K3 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Haiku 5.5AnthropicKimi K3Moonshot AIDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeek
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)160.4 (best)158.3158.8
ECI rank#14 of 165 (best)#20 of 165#19 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions89.7%93.1%93.2% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics75.1% (best)72.2%71.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics98.9%97.2%99.4% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions23.8%50.6% (best)42.5%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$3.00$0.15
Output$0.50 (best)$15.00$0.60
Cached input$0.01$0.30$0.003 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.20 (best)$6.00$0.263
Long-context rateOver 100K: $0.50 / $2.50Same rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIOfficial Moonshot AI APIOfficial DeepSeek API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)1,000,000 tokens
Max output128,000 tokens131,072 tokens384,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsYesNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · maxYeslow · high · maxYeslow · high · max
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenOpenMIT
API model IDclaude-haiku-5-5kimi-k3deepseek-flash
API providers3376 (best)40
ReleasedOct 7, 2026Jul 16, 2026Oct 17, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJun 2026—May 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.

  • Claude Haiku 5.5$2.00
  • Kimi K3$60.00
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$2.70
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Haiku 5.5, Kimi K3 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (79) and Kimi K3 (65). It leads on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5, Kimi K3 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official DeepSeek API price); Kimi K3 costs $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.20 per million tokens for Claude Haiku 5.5 versus $0.263 for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (1.3× as much) and $6.00 for Kimi K3 (30× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Haiku 5.5 160.4 (#14 of 165), DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 158.8 (#19 of 165) and Kimi K3 158.3 (#20 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (157.3–163.8 vs 156.7–162.2), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 93.2%, Kimi K3 93.1%, Claude Haiku 5.5 89.7%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Haiku 5.5 75.1%, Kimi K3 72.2%, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 71.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 99.4%, Claude Haiku 5.5 98.9%, Kimi K3 97.2%; SimpleQA Verified — Kimi K3 50.6%, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 42.5%, Claude Haiku 5.5 23.8%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Haiku 5.5, Kimi K3 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Haiku 5.5 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?

Kimi K3 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Claude Haiku 5.5 and 1,000,000 for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017. Maximum output per response: Claude Haiku 5.5 up to 128,000, Kimi K3 up to 131,072, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 up to 384,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Kimi K3 accepts text, images and video; DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 accepts text and images. Claude Haiku 5.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K3 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 5.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is the newest, released Oct 17, 2026. Claude Haiku 5.5 came out Oct 7, 2026; Kimi K3 came out Jul 16, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 5.5 Jun 2026, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 May 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.