Claude Opus 5 (Low) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Low) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Low) scores 4.6 points higher (39.4 vs 34.8) but costs 1.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1561 vs $1081; both premium class). Pick Claude Opus 5 (Low) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Low) | DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.4 | 34.8 | −11.7% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vis… is 11.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,560.91 | $1,081.42 | −30.7% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vis… is 30.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.44s | 15.95s | +39.4% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vis… is 39.4% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.44 / $1.32 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) vs Claude Opus 5 (Low): 11.7% less intelligence, 30.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 39.4% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Claude Opus 5 (Low)DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max)Today's Pareto 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-low/deepseek-v4-flash-vision · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-low/deepseek-v4-flash-vision?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill