Model comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Haiku 4.5 #77 (Estimated); DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Haiku 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Claude Haiku 4.5; 46 to DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max).
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude Haiku 4.5 only
- 3
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) only
- 46
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude Haiku 4.5 makes more sense if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) is the better fit if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
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
Claude Haiku 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
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 (Max). That is roughly 5.7x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Haiku 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) 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 | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Δ | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Haiku 4.54.9 | Margin→ 90.3 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)95.2 |
| Coding | Claude Haiku 4.573.3 | Margin← 2.4 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)70.9 |
| Agentic | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)74.5 |
| Knowledge | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)60.1 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.3%B 80.6%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 7.3SWE-bench Verified: Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 73.3%; DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 80.6%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5$1 input / $5 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5200K | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)1M | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| JobBenchSource | 16.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 67.9% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 48.2% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 73.6% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1307 | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 51.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 36.4% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 24.3% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 96.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 40.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 932 | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 40.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 38.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 25.8% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 46.2% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 64% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Haiku 4.5 wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.3% | 80.6% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| CodeforcesSource | — | 3206.0 | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 55.4% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 76.2% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 67.9% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 49.93% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 59.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 50.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 87.5% | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | — | 57.9% | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 90.1% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 90.1% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 37.7% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 44.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 88.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 35.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -10.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 43.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 94.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 50.0% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 5.903% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 2.083% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | — | 95.2% | Not comparable |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | — | 89.8% | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | — | 38.3% | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | — | 90.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1152 | 1264 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 76.5% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)?
Claude Haiku 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)?
Claude Haiku 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.3 versus 70.9. 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 (Max)?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 95.2 versus 4.9. Claude Haiku 4.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
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.