Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek-R1Which is better in 2026?

Comparing Claude 3.5 Haiku and DeepSeek-R1 across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek-R1 — which is better?

Claude 3.5 Haiku (by Anthropic) and DeepSeek-R1 (by DeepSeek) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

On price, DeepSeek-R1 is roughly 1.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude 3.5 Haiku also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose Claude 3.5 Haiku if…

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window

Choose DeepSeek-R1 if…

  • cost matters — it's about 1.7x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jan 2025
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Claude 3.5 Haiku and DeepSeek-R1don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-R1 costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($0.80/1M tokens) is 1.5x more expensive than DeepSeek-R1 ($0.55/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($4.00/1M tokens) is 1.8x more expensive than DeepSeek-R1 ($2.19/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Haiku is more expensive than DeepSeek-R1.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Jun 15 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-R1
Input tokens$0.55
Output tokens$2.19
Best providerDeepSeek
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude 3.5 Haiku accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek-R1's 131,072 tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while DeepSeek-R1 is limited to 131,072 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-R1
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Jun 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-R1 uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

DeepSeek-R1

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while DeepSeek-R1 was released on 2025-01-20.

DeepSeek-R1 is 3 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.6 years ago

DeepSeek-R1

Jan 20, 2025

1.4 years ago

3mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic. DeepSeek-R1 is available from DeepSeek, DeepInfra, Together, Fireworks.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $5.00/1M

DeepSeek-R1

deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.55/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.19/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.85/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.50/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $7.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $7.00/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $8.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $8.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
DeepSeek
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-R1

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek-R1.

Which is better, Claude 3.5 Haiku or DeepSeek-R1?

Claude 3.5 Haiku (Anthropic) and DeepSeek-R1 (DeepSeek) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does Claude 3.5 Haiku compare to DeepSeek-R1 in benchmarks?

Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%.

Is Claude 3.5 Haiku cheaper than DeepSeek-R1?

DeepSeek-R1 is 1.5x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku costs $0.80/M input and $4.00/M output via bedrock. DeepSeek-R1 costs $0.55/M input and $2.19/M output via deepseek.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.5 Haiku and DeepSeek-R1?

Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and DeepSeek-R1 supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3.5 Haiku and DeepSeek-R1?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 131K), input pricing ($0.80 vs $0.55/M), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.5 Haiku and DeepSeek-R1?

Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek-R1 is developed by DeepSeek.

Related comparisons