The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 60.3 to 39.0. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is 71.1x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · DeepSeek · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 60.3 to 39.0, ranking #1 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 5.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is roughly 71.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 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 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 60.3 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

  • cost matters — it's about 71.1x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
DeepSeek
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
60.3
#1
39.0
#67
Reasoning
58.4
#1
39.7
#62
Coding
51.4
#1
28.6
#64
Agents
45.7
#2
18.1
#76
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$4.00 / M
$0.09 / M
Output price
$20.00 / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Opus 5.5
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Math
42.7#4
39.2#22
Tool use
32.2#3
16.6#83
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

31 reported for Claude Opus 5.5 · 19 for DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

2 shared

Claude Opus 5.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Pro), while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Oct 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($4.00/1M tokens) is 44.4x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max ($0.09/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($20.00/1M tokens) is 111.1x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 5.5 is more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Oct 02 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input tokens$4.00
Output tokens$20.00
Best providerAnthropic
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Input tokens$0.09
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Opus 5.5's 1,000,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while Claude Opus 5.5 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output1,048,576 tokens
Fri Oct 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Opus 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max does not.

Claude Opus 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max uses MIT.

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

Claude Opus 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5.5 was released on 2026-09-22, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max was released on 2026-04-23.

Claude Opus 5.5 is 5 months newer than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max.

Claude Opus 5.5

Sep 22, 2026

1 weeks ago

5mo newer
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

Apr 23, 2026

5 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Opus 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Opus 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 5.5

Jun 2026

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

—

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 5.5 is available from Anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is available from DeepInfra, DeepSeek.

Claude Opus 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $4.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $20.00/1M

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.09/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.14/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.28/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5.5
✓ Preferred
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 60.3 to 39.0. Claude Opus 5.5 is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Opus 5.5 compare to DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.2%, Global-MMLU: 94.3%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 93.9%, MILU: 93.1%, ArXivMath: 91.2%. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max scores CodeForces: 100.0%, HMMT Feb 26: 94.8%, LiveCodeBench: 91.6%, IMO-AnswerBench: 88.4%, GPQA: 88.1%.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 cheaper than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is 44.4x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00/M input and $20.00/M output via anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max costs $0.09/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (60.3 vs 39.0), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($4.00 vs $0.09/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is developed by DeepSeek.

Related comparisons