Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek-R1-0528
Claude Opus 4.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 29.5 to 23.6. DeepSeek-R1-0528 is 32.9x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · DeepSeek · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Opus 4.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 29.5 to 23.6, ranking #147 overall.
The models split the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models evenly.
On price, DeepSeek-R1-0528 is roughly 32.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Claude Opus 4.1 also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude Opus 4.1
- overall performance matters — it scores 29.5 and ranks #147 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2025
Choose DeepSeek-R1-0528
- cost matters — it's about 32.9x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
8 reported for Claude Opus 4.1 · 16 for DeepSeek-R1-0528
Claude Opus 4.1 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench), while DeepSeek-R1-0528 is better at 2 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA).
Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Opus 4.1 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 30.0x more expensive than DeepSeek-R1-0528 ($0.50/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Opus 4.1 ($75.00/1M tokens) is 34.9x more expensive than DeepSeek-R1-0528 ($2.15/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.1 is more expensive than DeepSeek-R1-0528.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Claude Opus 4.1 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek-R1-0528's 163,840 tokens. DeepSeek-R1-0528 can generate longer responses up to 163,840 tokens, while Claude Opus 4.1 is limited to 32,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Claude Opus 4.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-R1-0528 does not.
Claude Opus 4.1 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Claude Opus 4.1
DeepSeek-R1-0528
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude Opus 4.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-R1-0528 uses MIT.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude Opus 4.1 was released on 2025-08-05, while DeepSeek-R1-0528 was released on 2025-05-28.
Claude Opus 4.1 is 2 months newer than DeepSeek-R1-0528.
Aug 5, 2025
1.2 years ago
2mo newerMay 28, 2025
1.4 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Claude Opus 4.1 is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. DeepSeek-R1-0528 is available from DeepInfra, DeepSeek, Novita.
Claude Opus 4.1
DeepSeek-R1-0528
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek-R1-0528 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek-R1-0528.