Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Claude Haiku 5.5 leads DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 on coding, 70.7 to 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Claude Haiku 5.5 costs 1.2x less per output token ($0.50 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 36 benchmarks have a result for both.
Claude Haiku 5.5 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: which to pick
Claude Haiku 5.5 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 are level for coding, 70.7 against 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide.
Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens) and work measured by LiveBench coding or LMArena WebDev, where it leads. Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($0.50 vs $0.60 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 36
- Claude Haiku 5.5 only
- 27
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 only
- 3
- Like-for-like categories
- 8 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Level: 70.7 against 70.3, inside 2 points.
5 and 4 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Claude Haiku 5.5
Claude Haiku 5.5 leads, 43.4 against 39.5.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 leads, 1311 against 1262.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 leads, 61.3% against 58.7%.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5
Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.0003, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Haiku 5.5 70.7 from 5 benchmarks, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 70.3 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Knowledge, 18.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- LiveBench data analysis: Claude Haiku 5.5 53.1% against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 79.5%, 26.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Haiku 5.5 $0.50 against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 $0.60 per million output tokens, 1.2x apart.
- Context window
- Claude Haiku 5.5 takes 1M tokens, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 1.05M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Bars | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 3 | 5 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 3 | 5 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 3 | ||
| Math | 1 | 1 | 1 tie | |
| Knowledge | 0 | 1 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 7 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | 1 tie | |
| All shared boards | 10 | 24 | 2 ties |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index35
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 91.4% | 96.0% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1586 | 1664 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 36.4% | 31.8% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 90.4% | 87.7% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 44.6% | 44.2% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 2.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | 47.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | 44.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI) | 20.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | 75.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SciCode | 55.0% | 55.9% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| FrontierCode | 46.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| FrontierSWE | 43.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 1622.0 | Only DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1605 | 1667 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1569 | 1687 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| SciCode | 9.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 43.4 | 39.5 | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 159.3 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index35
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: spreadsheets | Not measured | 1260 | Only DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured |
| LiveBench research | 81.9% | 79.5% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| LiveBench browser | 80.0% | 76.0% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| LiveBench long agentic | 57.6% | 50.9% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | 5.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 54.1% | 57.0% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 31.9% | 44.4% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 43.3% | 45.2% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 4.2% | 14.2% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 59.0% | 61.8% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 70.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 10.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vals Science Index | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| APEX-Agents | 56.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $3,602 | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 82.4% | 89.1% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 35.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 44.4% | 43.3% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 89.6% | 93.2% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| ARC-AGI | 89.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 55.0% | 46.0% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| Mystery game puzzles | 30.0% | 49.0% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| EBR-bench | 43.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 98.9% | 99.4% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 75.1% | 71.2% | Claude Haiku 5.5 |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 46.3% | 46.3% | Tie |
| ProofBench | 89.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 51.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | 42.5% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1262 | 1311 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1283 | 1306 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1315 | 1353 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1294 | 1312 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1342 | 1358 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1277 | 1331 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1235 | Only DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured |
| LiveBench design | 83.1% | 83.4% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 58.7% | 61.3% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| LiveBench data analysis | 53.1% | 79.5% | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 63.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 89.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 82.7% | 82.7% | Tie |
| DTBench | 95.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| LMCA | 51.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Furniture assembly | 47.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Haiku 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Anthropic Claude Haiku 5.5 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | October 7, 2026 | October 17, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.50 | $0.60 |
| Coding index | 70.7 | 70.3 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 5 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 for coding?
Claude Haiku 5.5 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 are level for coding, 70.7 against 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide. Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 for a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens) and work measured by LiveBench coding or LMArena WebDev, where it leads. Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 for output tokens 1.2x cheaper ($0.50 vs $0.60 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017?
Claude Haiku 5.5 costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Haiku 5.5 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 comparison based on?
36 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Haiku 5.5's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.