Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek R1 Zero

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while DeepSeek R1 Zero is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Apr 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Apr 17 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$75.00
Best providerAnthropic
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Zero
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Opus 4 specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4 specifies output context (32,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
Input200,000 tokens
Output32,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Zero
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Apr 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude Opus 4 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek R1 Zero does not.

Claude Opus 4 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 4

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek R1 Zero

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek R1 Zero uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Opus 4

Proprietary

Closed source

DeepSeek R1 Zero

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4 was released on 2025-05-22, while DeepSeek R1 Zero was released on 2025-01-20.

Claude Opus 4 is 4 months newer than DeepSeek R1 Zero.

Claude Opus 4

May 22, 2025

11 months ago

4mo newer
DeepSeek R1 Zero

Jan 20, 2025

1.2 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher GPQA score (79.6% vs 73.3%)
DeepSeek
Has open weights
AnthropicClaude Opus 4
DeepSeekDeepSeek R1 Zero
Compare in Playground

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Zero

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek R1 Zero

Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4 is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek R1 Zero is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude Opus 4 scores MMMLU: 88.8%, TAU-bench Retail: 81.4%, GPQA: 79.6%, MMMU (validation): 76.5%, AIME 2025: 75.5%. DeepSeek R1 Zero scores MATH-500: 95.9%, AIME 2024: 86.7%, GPQA: 73.3%, LiveCodeBench: 50.0%.
Claude Opus 4 supports 200K tokens and DeepSeek R1 Zero supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude Opus 4 is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek R1 Zero is developed by DeepSeek.