Model decision surface
Compare AI models
Start with Claude Haiku 4.5 and DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.
Current public data
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Live dataset updated 9/10/2026, 3:47:06 AM UTC
Open 1200×630 evidence receipt| Field | Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|
| ModelCap position | #63 | #66 |
| Index score | 55.3 | 54.1 |
| Evidence | Measured3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards | Measured3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards |
| Input / 1M | $1.00 | $0.27 |
| Output / 1M | $5.00 | $1.00 |
| Pricing status | fresh | fresh |
| Context | 200K | 164K |
| Providers | 4 | 4 |
| Weight access | API only | Open weights |
Decision facts
- Claude Haiku 4.5 is #63; DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus is #66 on the same current language board.
- Index scores are 55.3 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 54.1 for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
- Both positions use Measured evidence.
- Listed output price per 1M tokens is $5.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 and $1.00 for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $4.50 for Claude Haiku 4.5 versus $1.04 for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus. DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs 76.9% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.
- Published context is 200,000 tokens for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 163,840 for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus.
- Weight access differs: Claude Haiku 4.5 is none; DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus is open.
These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.
Popular comparisons
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6 Astra#2 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra#3 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3#3 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Astra#4 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Spark 1.3#4 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5#3 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra#5 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#2 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#3 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#4 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-6 Astra#6 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Kimi K3#2 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3#3 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3#4 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#6 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra#7 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3#7 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#3 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#4 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol#7 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Kimi K3#7 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-6 Astra vs GLM 5.3#1 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GLM 5.3#2 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GLM 5.3#3 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.