+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3 Haiku vs DeepSeek-V3.1
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
DeepSeek-V3.1 leads with 41.6% higher average benchmark score. Claude 3 Haiku offers 72.3K more tokens in context window than DeepSeek-V3.1. Both models have similar pricing. Claude 3 Haiku supports multimodal inputs. Overall, DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude 3 Haiku was created as the fastest and most affordable model in its intelligence class, processing 21K tokens per second for prompts under 32K tokens. Built for enterprise workloads requiring quick analysis of large datasets, it combines state-of-the-art vision capabilities with strong performance on industry benchmarks while prioritizing speed, affordability, and enterprise-grade security.
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.1 was developed as an incremental advancement over DeepSeek-V3, designed to refine the mixture-of-experts architecture with improved training techniques. Built to enhance quality and efficiency while maintaining the open-source philosophy, it represents continued iteration on DeepSeek's flagship model line.
10 months newer
Claude 3 Haiku
Anthropic
2024-03-13
DeepSeek-V3.1
DeepSeek
2025-01-10
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
Input:$0.25
Output:$1.25
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek-V3.1
Input:$0.27
Output:$1.00($0.23 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
Average Score:33.3%
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek-V3.1
Average Score:74.9%(+41.6%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 104 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Haiku
Avg Score:33.3%
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek-V3.1
Avg Score:74.9%(+41.6%)
Providers:2