Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (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 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 8.0 points higher (42.3 vs 34.3) but costs 4.3× as much to run the benchmark ($860 vs $200; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 34.3, and DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) when 34.3 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 42.3 | 34.3 | −18.9% DeepSeek V4 Flash 073… is 18.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $860.33 | $199.63 | −76.8% DeepSeek V4 Flash 073… is 76.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.42s | 17.91s | +33.5% DeepSeek V4 Flash 073… is 33.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback): 18.9% less intelligence, 76.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 33.5% slower end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/deepseek-v4-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/deepseek-v4-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill