Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) scores 15.6 points higher (45.1 vs 29.5) but costs 13× as much to run the benchmark ($445 vs $34.3; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when you need intelligence above 29.5, and Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) when 29.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 29.5 | 45.1 | +52.9% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 52.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $34.31 | $444.60 | +1195.8% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 13× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.45s | 15.96s | +39.4% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 39.4% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low): 52.9% more intelligence, 1195.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 39.4% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low)DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-low/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-low/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill