Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek V3
AI Matrix
Powered by Claude AIAnthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku and DeepSeek V3 are closely matched ai language models devices with nearly identical overall scores (6.5 vs 6.5). The best choice depends on which specific features matter most to you.
Comparaison des caractéristiques
Anthropic Claude 3.5 HaikuDeepSeek V3
Détail du score
Anthropic Claude 3.5 HaikuDeepSeek V3
9.6
Cost Efficiency20% weight
9.9Égalité
7.7
Benchmark (MMLU)30% weight
8.1Égalité
3.9
Arena ELO20% weight
6.2DeepSeek V3 Gagnant
1.9
Context Window10% weight
1.2Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku Gagnant
5.7
Speed (tok/s)10% weight
1.4Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku Gagnant
7.0
Coding (HumanEval)10% weight
5.6Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku Gagnant
Scores are relative within the ai language modelscategory. Percentages show each dimension's weight in the overall score. A difference of less than 0.5 points is considered a tie.
Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku
✓ Pros
- ●Better display quality
- ●Superior battery life
- ●Higher camera score
DeepSeek V3
✓ Pros
- ●Better build and design
✗ Cons
- ●Shorter battery life
- ●Lower display score
- ●Lower camera score
💰 Token Pricing (per 1M tokens)
Lower cost = better value. Free = open-source self-hosted.
| Metric | 3.5 Haiku | DeepSeek V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Input (Prompt) | $0.80/1M | ✓$0.27/1M |
| Output (Completion) | $4.00/1M | ✓$1.10/1M |
| Open Source | Proprietary | ✓ Free |
⚡ Context Window & Speed
Context Window (tokens)
3.5 Haiku200K
DeepSeek V3128K
| Metric | 3.5 Haiku | DeepSeek V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Max Output | 8,192 tok | 8,192 tok |
| Speed | ✓180 tok/s | 60 tok/s |
| Time to First Token | ✓350ms | 800ms |
| Languages | ✓50+ | 20+ |
📊 Benchmark Scores
Higher is better. Industry-standard AI evaluation benchmarks.
3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek V3
MMLU (Knowledge)
87.1|88.5
3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek V3
HumanEval (Coding)
88.2|82.6
3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek V3
MATH (Mathematics)
69.2|75.7
3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek V3
GPQA (Expert Q&A)
41.6|59.1
3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek V3
Chatbot Arena ELO
1255.0|1318.0
3.5 Haiku
DeepSeek V3
🔧 Capabilities
| Feature | 3.5 Haiku | DeepSeek V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Reasoning / Chain-of-Thought | ✕ | ✕ |
| Vision (Image Input) | ✓ | ✕ |
| Audio Input | ✕ | ✕ |
| Video Input | ✕ | ✕ |
| Image/Audio Output | ✕ | ✕ |
| Function Calling / Tools | ✓ | ✓ |
| JSON Mode | ✓ | ✓ |
| Real-time Web Access | ✕ | ✕ |
| Fine-tuning Support | ✕ | ✓ |
| Batch API | ✓ | ✓ |
| Streaming | ✓ | ✓ |
| Open Source | ✕ | ✓ |
ℹ️ Model Details
| Field | 3.5 Haiku | DeepSeek V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Parameters | — | 671B (37B active) |
| Knowledge Cutoff | 2024-07 | 2024-07 |
| License | Commercial | MIT |
| Best For | fast taskshigh volumecost efficiencycoding | cost efficiencycodingopen sourcegeneral |
Qui devrait acheter
Buy Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku if…
The Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku is worth considering if you prefer its specific design, ecosystem, or brand — though it scores lower overall in our comparison.
Buy DeepSeek V3 if…
The DeepSeek V3 is worth considering if you prefer its specific design, ecosystem, or brand — though it scores lower overall in our comparison.
Community Vote
Who do you think wins this matchup?
Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek V3 — FAQ
Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku vs DeepSeek V3: which is better?
Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku and DeepSeek V3 are closely matched ai language models devices with nearly identical overall scores (6.5 vs 6.5). The best choice depends on which specific features matter most to you.
Is Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku better than DeepSeek V3?
Both products score similarly — it depends on your priorities.
Which is cheaper, Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku or DeepSeek V3?
Check the latest prices using the buy links above.
Who should buy the Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku?
The Anthropic Claude 3.5 Haiku is worth considering if you prefer its specific design, ecosystem, or brand — though it scores lower overall in our comparison.
Who should buy the DeepSeek V3?
The DeepSeek V3 is worth considering if you prefer its specific design, ecosystem, or brand — though it scores lower overall in our comparison.
