Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek V3.1
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Claude Opus 4.1 wins on 3/5 benchmarks
Claude Opus 4.1 wins 3 of 5 shared benchmarks. Leads in reasoning · coding.
Category leads
general·DeepSeek V3.1knowledge·DeepSeek V3.1reasoning·Claude Opus 4.1coding·Claude Opus 4.1
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Claude Opus 4.1
#213 by perf·#9 by attention
DeepSeek V3.1
#118 by perf·no signal
Best value
DeepSeek V3.1
104.5x better value than Claude Opus 4.1
Claude Opus 4.1
0.8 pts/$
$45.00/M
DeepSeek V3.1
84.5 pts/$
$0.60/M
Vendor risk
Mixed exposure
One or more vendors flagged
Anthropic
$965.0B·Tier 1
DeepSeek
$3.4B·Tier 1
Head to head
5 benchmarks · 2 models
Claude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.1
Dtbench
DeepSeek V3.1 leads by +4.5
Claude Opus 4.1
66.7
DeepSeek V3.1
71.1
Lech Mazur Writing
DeepSeek V3.1 leads by +0.5
Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication.
Claude Opus 4.1
84.7
DeepSeek V3.1
85.2
Lmca
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +15.0
Claude Opus 4.1
43.6
DeepSeek V3.1
28.6
SimpleBench
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +24.0
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Claude Opus 4.1
52.0
DeepSeek V3.1
28.0
WeirdML
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +7.5
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Claude Opus 4.1
45.9
DeepSeek V3.1
38.4
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 |
|---|---|---|
Dtbench | 66.7 | 71.1 |
Lech Mazur Writing Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication. | 84.7 | 85.2 |
Lmca | 43.6 | 28.6 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 52.0 | 28.0 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 45.9 | 38.4 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $15.00 | $75.00 | 200K tokens (~100 books) | $300.00 | |
| $0.25 | $0.95 | 164K tokens (~82 books) | $4.25 |
People also compared