Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) 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 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 33.2 points higher (57.6 vs 24.4) but costs 72× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $121; 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 24.4, and DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) when 24.4 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.6 | 24.4 | −57.6% DeepSeek V4 Flash 042… is 57.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,708.20 | $121.20 | −98.6% DeepSeek V4 Flash 042… is 98.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 626.13s | Not reported | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.11 / $0.23 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback): 57.6% less intelligence, 98.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/deepseek-v4-flash-0420-high · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/deepseek-v4-flash-0420-high?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill