Model Markets
Get Free API KeyAPI

Claude Opus 5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro

Market Position

LiveBench Quality Versus Estimated Output Cost

Full ranking →
Efficiency FrontierLiveBench overall · output estimate
Upper-left is better
xAIDeepSeekZ.aiMiniMaxOpenAIQwenGoogle DeepMindMoonshot AIAnthropic
LiveBench quality versus score-adjusted output costEach dot is a reviewed major-model configuration and is colored by developer. Higher means a better LiveBench overall score. Farther left means lower estimated output cost after adjusting by the score. A dotted line connects the non-dominated frontier observations. When models are selected, their sourced families remain prominent, unrelated observations retain their developer colors at lower opacity, and an orange ring identifies each selected model.$0.0050$0.010$0.020$0.050$0.100$0.200$0.5006873788287Grok Build 0.1GLM 5.3 FlashGPT-5.6 Luna (max)DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpGPT-5.6 Sol (max)Score-adjusted output cost per LiveBench case (log) →LiveBench overall →
The dotted frontier connects measured, non-dominated major-model observations. With a selection, sourced families stay prominent, unrelated observations retain their developer colors at lower opacity, and orange rings mark the selected model or models. Family lines connect models only when their sourced family and generation match. Cost is estimated from published output tokens and the lowest current USD output rate; it excludes input, caching, batch discounts, and provider-specific benchmark execution details.

This current-market view appears only when both compared models are reviewed current models with publisher-reported LiveBench token accounting and current sourced USD output rates.

Model Markets Rankings

Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency

All rankings →
RankingClaude Opus 5DeepSeek-V4-Pro
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v1.2#2 of 2294.1 scoreUnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#33 of 36$0.371 per LiveBench case#9 of 36$0.054 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.0#7 of 2256.8 scoreUnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort

Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5DeepSeek-V4-Pro
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,504.96100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-5-max; 95% CI [1499.16488972, 1510.76500615]; votes 16839; rank 11,451.0096% of row best · rating · deepseek-v4-pro; 95% CI [1447.00829245, 1454.98663953]; votes 54243; rank 41
LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader83.44100% of row best · percent · claude-opus-5-max-effort · 14,826 output tokens / case76.7992% of row best · percent · deepseek-v4-pro · 35,014 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above2 benchmark winsOverall lead0 benchmark wins

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

FieldAt a Glance
Anthropic · activeClaude Opus 5Verified Aug 28, 2026
DeepSeek · activeDeepSeek V4 ProVerified Aug 28, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldClaude Opus 5DeepSeek-V4-Pro
DeveloperAnthropicDeepSeek
FamilyClaude 5Deepseek V4 Pro
ModelClaude Opus 5DeepSeek-V4-Pro
VersionClaude Opus 5DeepSeek-V4-Pro
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-07-242026-04-24
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K1,049K
Total parametersUnknown1.6T
Active parametersUnknown49B
LicenseUnknownmit
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)DeepSeek (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning

14 comparable fields · 11 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Claude Opus 5 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$5.00
Output price$25.00
Serving providers3
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-opus-5

DeepSeek V4 Pro Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoning
Input price$0.66
Output price$1.5441
Serving providers6
Canonical IDdeepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Pro

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All text comparisons →
APairBContext
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Models overview | Claude Platform DocsAnthropic · observed Aug 28, 2026deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Pro developer model repositoryDeepSeek · observed Aug 28, 2026LMArena Text Arena text-2026-09-01-011508720696 score tableLMArena · observed Sep 4, 2026LiveBench 2026-06-25 score tableLiveBench · observed Sep 4, 2026LiveBench 2026-06-25 token accountingLiveBench · observed Sep 4, 2026

Questions

Claude Opus 5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro FAQs

Is Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

Claude Opus 5 is $5.00 and DeepSeek V4 Pro is $0.66 per million tokens, so DeepSeek V4 Pro is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 5 is $25.00 and DeepSeek V4 Pro is $1.5441 per million tokens, so DeepSeek V4 Pro is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

DeepSeek V4 Pro has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 5 supports 1,000K and DeepSeek V4 Pro supports 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

Claude Opus 5 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 2 protocol-matched benchmarks from 2 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.

Can Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro be self-hosted?+

DeepSeek V4 Pro is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 5 is not marked open weight; DeepSeek V4 Pro is open weight.

Can Claude Opus 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro understand images?+

Claude Opus 5 is documented with image input; DeepSeek V4 Pro is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 5 is 128K and DeepSeek V4 Pro is —.

Do Claude Opus 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Opus 5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. DeepSeek V4 Pro: reasoning. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

Claude Opus 5 has 3 sourced provider routes; DeepSeek V4 Pro has 6, so DeepSeek V4 Pro has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

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