DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Haiku 5.5

Overall
56
vs
Overall
70

Claude Haiku 5.5 is clearly better. It wins 32 of the 42 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 spends 1.6× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
5626.0s
5.3K, 91% thinking3.9K, 78% thinking
7025.5s
Agents
5826.7s
3.3K, 71% thinking3.7K, 61% thinking
6139.5s
Structured Extraction
8117.2s
4.2K, 93% thinking2.6K, 83% thinking
9013.5s
Coding
4840.8s
9.4K, 95% thinking6.8K, 76% thinking
8630.6s
Grounded Answers
7119.8s
4.4K, 91% thinking2.2K, 78% thinking
7613.9s
Instruction Following
7625.6s
5.5K, 91% thinking4.3K, 82% thinking
9431.5s
Business Logic
6726.6s
6.6K, 97% thinking5.5K, 95% thinking
6726.0s
Security & permissions
4826.6s
4.7K, 87% thinking2.7K, 70% thinking
6723.4s
Diagnosis & investigation
020.2s
3.2K, 74% thinking2.3K, 50% thinking
1725.5s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
243 tok/s (better)
225 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
1M
1M
Cost per run
$0.75
$0.42 (better)
Cost per case
$0.0049
$0.0028 (better)
Time per case
26.0s
25.5s (better)
Quantization
—
—
Harness
openrouter
openrouter

The race

4 lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Claude Haiku 5.5
025507510050100150Perfect run5670

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

10 won by DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 101732 won by Claude Haiku 5.5111 tied