Claude Opus 4.5 vs DeepSeek V3.2

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#27 of 4655.4 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 36.9–70.3UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#40 of 44$0.380 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#36 of 3838.0 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 28.8–45.4UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$5.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$0.26Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$25.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$0.38Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens200K164K
Model facts checkedSep 3, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,447.08100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-5-20251101-high-32k; 95% CI [1443.17965746, 1450.98398333]; votes 36239; rank 491,424.8098% of row best · rating · deepseek-v3.2; 95% CI [1421.27271719, 1428.32733406]; votes 46458; rank 96
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above1 benchmark winNo overall winner0 benchmark winsNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldClaude Opus 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2
DeveloperAnthropicDeepSeek
FamilyClaude 4Deepseek V3 2
ModelClaude Opus 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2
VersionClaude Opus 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2025-11-242025-12-01
Knowledge cutoff2025-05-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window200K164K
Total parametersUnknown685.4B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownmit
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, reasoning

Claude Opus 4.5 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers1
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-opus-4-5

DeepSeek V3.2 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoning
Serving providers3
Canonical IDdeepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3.2

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Opus 4.5 vs DeepSeek V3.2 FAQs

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.5 and DeepSeek V3.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?+

Claude Opus 4.5 is $5.00 and DeepSeek V3.2 is $0.26 per million tokens, so DeepSeek V3.2 is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.5 is $25.00 and DeepSeek V3.2 is $0.38 per million tokens, so DeepSeek V3.2 is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?+

Claude Opus 4.5 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 4.5 supports 200K and DeepSeek V3.2 supports 164K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2 be self-hosted?+

DeepSeek V3.2 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 4.5 is not marked open weight; DeepSeek V3.2 is open weight.

Can Claude Opus 4.5 and DeepSeek V3.2 understand images?+

Claude Opus 4.5 is documented with image input; DeepSeek V3.2 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 4.5 is 64K and DeepSeek V3.2 is —.

Do Claude Opus 4.5 and DeepSeek V3.2 support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Opus 4.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. DeepSeek V3.2: reasoning. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?+

Claude Opus 4.5 has 1 sourced provider route; DeepSeek V3.2 has 3, so DeepSeek V3.2 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback