Model Comparison
Claude 3.5 Haiku
vs. V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort)
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Anthropic, DeepSeek
Recommended Pick
De V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) 13 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort)
100.0 value score
50.6 reasoning / $0.18/1M
Lowest Price
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort)
$0.14/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort)
50.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) is 5.7x cheaper on input tokens than Claude 3.5 Haiku.
Reasoning gap
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) leads Claude 3.5 Haiku by 24.2 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) wins 13 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 3.5 Haiku | Top Pick De V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.80/1M | $0.14/1M |
| Output Cost | $4.00/1M | $0.28/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.60/1M | $0.18/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Release Date | Oct 22, 2024 | Apr 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | — |
| TTFT | — | — |
| Latency | — | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 5.7 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 26.4 | 50.6 |
| Intelligence | 12.4 | 37.4 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 40.8% | 86.7% |
| MMLU Pro | 63.4% | — |
| HLE | 3.5% | 27.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 31.4% | — |
| MATH 500 | 72.1% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 3.3% | — |
| SciCode | 27.4% | 42.0% |
| LCR | 23.3% | 62.7% |
| IFBench | 42.8% | 73.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 24.6% | 95.6% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 2.3% | 38.6% |
Key Takeaways
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) offers the best value at $0.14/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 50.6 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude 3.5 Haiku
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
V4 Flash (Reasoning, High Effort)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
