Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 8.5 points higher (53.6 vs 45.1) but costs 4.9× as much to run the benchmark ($2172 vs $445; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 45.1, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when 45.1 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.6 | 45.1 | −15.9% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 15.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,172.43 | $444.60 | −79.5% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 79.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 33.81s | 14.55s | −57.0% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 57.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback): 15.9% less intelligence, 79.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 57.0% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-high/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-high/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill