Claude Opus 5 (Max) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Max) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) 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 (Max) scores 11.3 points higher (50.8 vs 39.5) but costs 11× as much to run the benchmark ($7275 vs $672; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Max) when you need intelligence above 39.5, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) when 39.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Max) | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 50.8 | 39.5 | −22.2% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 22.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $7,274.74 | $671.96 | −90.8% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 90.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 50.36s | 14.92s | −70.4% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 70.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.29 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) vs Claude Opus 5 (Max): 22.2% less intelligence, 90.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 70.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Claude Opus 5 (Max)DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max)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/deepseek-v4-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5/deepseek-v4-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill