Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Devstral Small 1.1 for Creative Problem Solving
Winner: Claude Haiku 4.5. In our testing on the Creative Problem Solving task, Claude Haiku 4.5 scores 4 versus Devstral Small 1.1's 2 (a 2-point margin). Haiku 4.5's advantage is supported by much higher strategic_analysis (5 vs 2), tool_calling (5 vs 4), faithfulness (5 vs 4), and long_context (5 vs 4) in our benchmarks. Devstral Small 1.1 is far cheaper (input 0.1 / output 0.3 per mTok vs Haiku's 1 / 5) but does not match Haiku's ability to produce non-obvious, specific, and feasible ideas in our tests.
anthropic
Claude Haiku 4.5
Benchmark Scores
External Benchmarks
Pricing
Input
$1.00/MTok
Output
$5.00/MTok
modelpicker.net
mistral
Devstral Small 1.1
Benchmark Scores
External Benchmarks
Pricing
Input
$0.100/MTok
Output
$0.300/MTok
modelpicker.net
Task Analysis
Creative Problem Solving requires generation of non-obvious, specific, feasible ideas plus robust reasoning about tradeoffs and execution. Key capabilities are strategic analysis (nuanced tradeoff reasoning), tool_calling (sequencing and accurate arguments for multi-step proposals), faithfulness (sticking to constraints and source facts), long_context (holding large briefs and constraints), and structured_output (clear, actionable plans). External benchmarks are not provided for these models, so our winner call is based on internal task scores. Claude Haiku 4.5 scores 4 on creative_problem_solving and ranks 9 of 52 for this task; Devstral Small 1.1 scores 2 and ranks 46 of 52. The gap is explained by Haiku's top-tier strategic_analysis (5 vs 2) and superior agentic planning signals (agentic_planning 5 vs 2), which support generating ideas that are not only creative but implementable. Devstral Small 1.1 performs acceptably on structured_output and classification (both 4) but lacks the deeper strategic reasoning and persona consistency (2) that help push ideas from novelty into feasibility.
Practical Examples
Where Claude Haiku 4.5 shines: 1) Product strategy brainstorms that require tradeoff analysis and prioritized, feasible feature lists—Haiku's strategic_analysis 5 and creative_problem_solving 4 produce actionable, non-obvious proposals. 2) Multi-step creative workflows that require tool sequencing or explicit function arguments—tool_calling 5 reduces error in plan execution. 3) Long-brief ideation (R&D whitepapers or multi-part design constraints)—long_context 5 and faithfulness 5 keep ideas coherent and grounded. Where Devstral Small 1.1 is useful: 1) Low-cost, high-volume idea sketches or early-stage prompts where budget matters—input/output costs are 0.1/0.3 per mTok versus Haiku's 1/5. 2) Quick structured templates or classification-driven routing—structured_output and classification are both 4. 3) Simple creativity tasks where deep strategic tradeoffs are unnecessary (Devstral's creative_problem_solving 2 and strategic_analysis 2 limit its ability to produce detailed, feasible plans). Practical score grounding: Haiku leads by 2 task points (4 vs 2) and holds far better ranks on strategic_analysis and agentic_planning, explaining its stronger, implementable idea generation in our tests.
Bottom Line
For Creative Problem Solving, choose Claude Haiku 4.5 if you need non-obvious, specific, and executable ideas backed by strong strategic reasoning, tool sequencing, and long-context coherence. Choose Devstral Small 1.1 if budget is the primary constraint and you need low-cost, high-volume idea sketches or reliable structured outputs without deep strategic tradeoffs.
How We Test
We test every model against our 12-benchmark suite covering tool calling, agentic planning, creative problem solving, safety calibration, and more. Each test is scored 1–5 by an LLM judge. Read our full methodology.