New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

vs

Which one, when

Both are budget models with a 1000000-token context and text and image input. claude-haiku-5-5 is cheaper per token, $0.1 input and $0.5 output against $0.3 and $1.2, with cache reads at $0.01 against $0.03, but it bills prompts above 100000 tokens at 5x, where deepseek-v4.1-flash keeps one rate and becomes the cheaper one. deepseek-v4.1-flash also allows much longer responses: 393216 output tokens against 128000. Pick claude-haiku-5-5 for short prompts at volume, and deepseek-v4.1-flash for long prompts or long outputs.

Benchmarks

Claude Haiku 5.5: the vendor has not published benchmark scores.

Above averageNo peer higherDeepSeek V4.1 Flash14 / 194 / 19
Claude Haiku 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash other models measured peer average ★ no peer scored higher
DeepSWE 1.1
N/A
no peer scored higher 74.2%
Cybergym
N/A
no peer scored higher 88.1%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
90.9%
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
31.8%
Chartography with tools
N/A
78.9%

Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

Pricing

Claude Haiku 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Δ
Input / 1M tokens $0.1 $0.3 0.33×
Output / 1M tokens $0.5 $1.2 0.42×
Cache read / 1M tokens $0.01 $0.03 0.33×
Cache write 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) no separate charge -

Rates from the live catalogue at build time; each model page carries the current rate card.

Where they sit · input price per 1M tokens across all 78 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

Capabilities

Claude Haiku 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Tool calling yes yes
Thinking control configurable yes (vendor dial not published)
Structured output yes -
Prompt caching explicit (you mark the prefix) implicit (automatic)
Cache lifetime 5m default, 1h option no fixed TTL (evicted when unused)
Minimum cached prefix 1024 tokens not published

Specs

Claude Haiku 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Input modalities text image text image
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-10-07 2026-09-10
Knowledge cutoff 2026-06 -
Context window 1M 1M
Max output 128K 393K
Thinking parameter output_config.effort -
Accepted values
output_config.effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
-
Default medium -

Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: Claude Haiku 5.5 · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

One prompt, both models, measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model generate a long internal chain of thought before its answer, and those thinking tokens are billed as output tokens, which cost several times more than input tokens. The model often produces many times more output per request than it did without reasoning, so the per-call cost rises even when the visible answer looks about the same length. Because that extra spend scales with every request, the bill roughly doubled, and we can control it by setting reasoning budgets, using reasoning only for tasks that need it, or routing simpler requests to a non-reasoning model.

out 332 tok (+159 thinking) latency 2.9 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning changed the unit economics: the model now spends extra billable tokens internally to “think” before producing the answer, and those reasoning tokens are charged like output tokens even though users never see them. That added token generation—plus longer contexts and occasional retries on harder prompts—roughly doubled our cost per request. We can control this by capping reasoning depth, routing only complex queries to reasoning models, and caching common prompts to bring the bill back down.

out 423 tok (+327 thinking) latency 14.6 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences, so countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that `cur` counts adjacent equal *pairs*, not run *elements*. A run of k equal items produces k−1 matching pairs, so the function returns one less than the true length, and a single-element input produces no pairs at all, so it returns 0 instead of 1. Resetting `cur` to 0 on a mismatch compounds this by starting every run one step behind. The fix starts both `cur` and `best` at 1 (a non-empty list always has a run of at least one element), resets `cur` to 1 on a mismatch, and updates `best` after every element rather than only inside the equal-branch. The empty-list guard keeps the function from returning 1 for `[]`. […]

out 1012 tok (+591 thinking) latency 6.0 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that `cur` is counting equal adjacent pairs, not elements in the current run: every time `xs[i] == xs[i - 1]`, the run length increases by one element, but the first element of the run was never counted, so all runs are undercounted by one. Also, `best` starts at `0`, so single-element inputs return `0` instead of `1`, and a one-element run ending at the last index is missed entirely.

out 918 tok (+733 thinking) latency 11.4 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Formal guidance withheld pending the Q4 "

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Formal guidance withheld pending the Q4 close" } ``` Notes: The text gives revenue as 412 but doesn't state the currency, so I left `revenue_usd_m` as null. Growth is "eleven and change," so 11 is an approximation.

out 725 tok (+572 thinking) latency 4.6 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11.0,"guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

out 1707 tok (+1667 thinking) latency 15.1 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

Claude Haiku 5.5 passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Prompt Cache Sync, the newest feature in GatewayOne.** Teams routing requests across OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google have often paid to process the same long system prompts again and again. Now the gateway stores those prompts once and reuses them wherever they appear, regardless of provider. Repeated context is matched by content hash, so cached prefixes return faster and cost less, with no changes to your application code. How much could this save your team? Enable Prompt Cache Sync from the dashboard, and your next billing report will show the difference. Cache entries follow your existing retention settings and can be purged per project at any time. Availability begins this week for all Scale and Enterprise plans worldwide. Start today.

out 2164 tok (+1929 thinking) latency 9.9 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 116 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Cache for our API gateway. It stores identical prompt requests and their responses across supported model providers, then serves cached results when a match is found. Teams can cut duplicate inference costs, reduce latency, and keep behavior consistent during provider failover. The cache works with configurable TTLs, per-route rules, and cache-key controls, so you decide what is reusable and what must stay fresh. Does your application send the same prompts to multiple providers? Now your gateway can answer many of those calls without another upstream request. Existing observability dashboards show hit rates, saved tokens, and estimated spend reduction. Enable it in the gateway console, set your policy, and start caching today.

out 917 tok (+770 thinking) latency 9.0 s

Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.

Switch between them with one line

Both ids are in every tab below; the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-haiku-5-5",
    # model="deepseek-v4.1-flash",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get your API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper on the "Input / 1M tokens" row ($0.1 vs $0.3, 3.0× apart). Other rows may point the other way; the table above carries the full rate card, and real cost depends on your mix.

Can I A/B test Claude Haiku 5.5 against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key. Switching is a one-line change to the model id, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Do Claude Haiku 5.5 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash support prompt caching?

Yes. Both bill cache reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies