Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek-V3.1
Claude Opus 4 leads the LLM Stats Score 27.7 to 22.1. DeepSeek-V3.1 is 70.6x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · DeepSeek · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Opus 4 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 27.7 to 22.1, ranking #138 overall.
In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 4 wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, DeepSeek-V3.1 is roughly 70.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Claude Opus 4 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
- overall performance matters — it scores 27.7 and ranks #138 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped May 2025
Choose DeepSeek-V3.1
- cost matters — it's about 70.6x 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
9 reported for Claude Opus 4 · 16 for DeepSeek-V3.1
Claude Opus 4 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench), while DeepSeek-V3.1 is better at 0 benchmarks.
Claude Opus 4 significantly outperforms across most 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 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 60.0x more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.1 ($0.25/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Opus 4 ($75.00/1M tokens) is 78.9x more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.1 ($0.95/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Opus 4 is more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.1.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Claude Opus 4 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek-V3.1's 163,840 tokens. DeepSeek-V3.1 can generate longer responses up to 163,840 tokens, while Claude Opus 4 is limited to 32,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Claude Opus 4 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V3.1 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
DeepSeek-V3.1
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude Opus 4 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-V3.1 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 was released on 2025-05-22, while DeepSeek-V3.1 was released on 2025-01-10.
Claude Opus 4 is 4 months newer than DeepSeek-V3.1.
May 22, 2025
1.3 years ago
4mo newerJan 10, 2025
1.7 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 is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. DeepSeek-V3.1 is available from DeepInfra, Novita.
Claude Opus 4
DeepSeek-V3.1
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4 and DeepSeek-V3.1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek-V3.1.