Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Apr 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Apr 06 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.5 Haiku specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Apr 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B 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 Distill Qwen 1.5B

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B was released on 2025-01-20.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B is 3 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B

Jan 20, 2025

1.2 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher GPQA score (41.6% vs 33.8%)
DeepSeek
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B

Claude 3.5 Haiku significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Haiku is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B scores MATH-500: 83.9%, AIME 2024: 52.7%, GPQA: 33.8%, LiveCodeBench: 16.9%.
Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B is developed by DeepSeek.