Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 46.2 points higher (57.6 vs 11.4) but costs 19× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $461; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 11.4, and DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) when 11.4 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.6 | 11.4 | −80.2% DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) is 80.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,708.20 | $460.74 | −94.7% DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) is 94.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 626.13s | 20.20s | −96.8% DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) is 96.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $2.00 / $4.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback): 80.2% less intelligence, 94.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 96.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/deepseek-r1-0120 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/deepseek-r1-0120?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill