Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

56.58/100
Margin
4.1pts
winning →
60.66/100
1 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Haiku 4.5 #77 (Estimated); DeepSeek V4 Pro #46 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Haiku 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Claude Haiku 4.5; 21 to DeepSeek V4 Pro.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
2
Claude Haiku 4.5 only
3
DeepSeek V4 Pro only
21
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Haiku 4.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V4 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 60.66 to 56.58. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

DeepSeek V4 Pro's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 31.7 against 4.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 73.6%. Claude Haiku 4.5 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Haiku 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.00 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro. That is roughly 5.7x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Haiku 4.5.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Haiku 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro
CategoryClaude Haiku 4.5ΔDeepSeek V4 Pro
MathClaude Haiku 4.54.9Margin 26.8DeepSeek V4 Pro31.7
CodingClaude Haiku 4.573.3Margin 8.0DeepSeek V4 Pro65.3
AgenticClaude Haiku 4.5Not measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Pro59.1
KnowledgeClaude Haiku 4.5Not measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Pro41.3

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Haiku 4.5B · DeepSeek V4 Pro
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 73.3%B 73.6%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProΔ 0.3
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 73.3%; DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 73.6%. DeepSeek V4 Pro wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V4 ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Haiku 4.5$1 input / $5 outputDeepSeek V4 Pro$0.435 input / $0.87 outputDeepSeek V4 Pro has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Haiku 4.5Not availableDeepSeek V4 ProNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Haiku 4.5Not availableDeepSeek V4 ProNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Haiku 4.5200KDeepSeek V4 Pro1MDeepSeek V4 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V4 ProResult
JobBenchSource 16.0%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 69.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 46.3%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 59.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 50.28%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 17.1%Not comparable
CodingClaude Haiku 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V4 ProResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.3%73.6%DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
SWE-bench ProSource 52.1%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 69.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V4 ProResult
MRCR 1MSource 44.7%Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 35.6%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V4 ProResult
MMLU-ProSource 82.9%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 45%Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 75.8%Not comparable
GPQASource 72.9%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 72.9%Not comparable
HLESource 7.7%Not comparable
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro wins
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V4 ProResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 5.903%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 2.083%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 31.7%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 35.3%Not comparable
ApexSource 0.4%Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 9.2%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Haiku 4.5DeepSeek V4 ProResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 11521264DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.66 to 56.58. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.3% and 73.6%.

Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.3 versus 65.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?

DeepSeek V4 Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 31.7 versus 4.9. Claude Haiku 4.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.