Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-01.
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallbac… scores 38.5 points higher (57.0 vs 18.5) but costs 15× as much to run the benchmark ($4766 vs $310; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 18.5, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) when 18.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.0 | 18.5 | −67.5% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 67.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,765.91 | $310.24 | −93.5% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 93.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 126.43s | 3.92s | −96.9% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 96.9% 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 (Non-reasoning) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback): 67.5% less intelligence, 93.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 96.9% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Terra (High) scores 42.30 for $267.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-xhigh/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-xhigh/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill