Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek R1 benchmark

Name: Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek R1 AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude Opus 4 (Anthropic) and DeepSeek R1 (DeepSeek) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, Claude Opus 4 is ahead by 132 points (1,490 vs 1,358; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Claude Opus 4 resolves 72.5% versus 65.2% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). DeepSeek R1 streams faster (62 tok/s) while DeepSeek R1 is the cheaper output token ($2.5/1M). Claude Opus 4 has the larger context window (200k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4

First Claude 4 Opus generation. Baseline for opus 4 vs opus 5.

Elo 1,490$75/1M out

DeepSeek

DeepSeek R1

Open-weights reasoning model trained with large-scale RL.

Elo 1,358$2.5/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Opus 4 (7)vsDeepSeek R1 (3)

Claude Opus 4: 7W (70%)Overall: Claude Opus 4DeepSeek R1: 3W (30%)

← Claude Opus 4DeepSeek R1 →

Claude Opus 4 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,490vs1,358

Coding Elo

1,502vs—

SWE-bench

72.5%vs65.2%

LiveBench

66.8%vs59%

GPQA Diamond

80.4%vs79.8%

Claude Opus 4: 5WDeepSeek R1: 0W

Tied (1/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

58 tok/svs62 tok/s

Time to first token

390 msvs420 ms

Claude Opus 4: 1WDeepSeek R1: 1W

DeepSeek R1 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$75/1Mvs$2.5/1M

Input price

$15/1Mvs$0.7/1M

Context window

200kvs64k

Claude Opus 4: 1WDeepSeek R1: 2W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageClaude Opus 4 4/6

Preference Elo

Claude Opus 4

132 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

DeepSeek R1

4 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

DeepSeek R1

$72.50/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

+10%1,490

EloHigh is better

1,358

Code Elo

High is better

1,502

Code EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

+13%66.8%

LiveBenchHigh is better

59%

SWE-bench

High is better

+11%72.5%

SWE-benchHigh is better

65.2%

GPQA

High is better

+1%80.4%

GPQAHigh is better

79.8%

TTFT

Low is better

+8%390 ms

TTFTLow is better

420 ms

Speed

High is better

58 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

62 tok/s+7%

In $

Low is better

$15/1M

In $Low is better

$0.7/1M+2043%

Out $

Low is better

$75/1M

Out $Low is better

$2.5/1M+2900%

Context

High is better

+213%200k

ContextHigh is better

64k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 96% with DeepSeek R1

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude Opus 4$1,650.00 / mo

In: $525.00Out: $1125.00

DeepSeek R1$62.00 / mo

In: $24.50Out: $37.50

Estimated Cost Delta

DeepSeek R1 is estimated to save $1,588.00/month ($19,056/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Claude Opus 4:Pick Claude Opus 4 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
DeepSeek R1:Pick DeepSeek R1 when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Claude Opus 4:Pick Claude Opus 4 when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude Opus 4

Higher SWE-bench (72.5%).

High-volume chatDeepSeek R1

Lower output list price ($2.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude Opus 4

Lower TTFT (390 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude Opus 4

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4

Claude Opus 4 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude Opus 4	Higher SWE-bench (72.5%).
High-volume chat	DeepSeek R1	Lower output list price ($2.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude Opus 4	Lower TTFT (390 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude Opus 4	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Opus 4	Claude Opus 4 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchJan 20, 2025

DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Jan 2025 reasoning model. Still searched. V4 Pro is the newer DeepSeek buy.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-opus-4-vs-deepseek-r1/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4

Elo 1,490

LiveBench66.8%

SWE-bench72.5%

Speed58 tok/s

Output cost$75/1M

DeepSeek

DeepSeek R1

Elo 1,358

LiveBench59%

SWE-bench65.2%

Speed62 tok/s

Output cost$2.5/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek R1?: Claude Opus 4 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,490). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek R1?: Claude Opus 4 leads SWE-bench at 72.5% vs 65.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: DeepSeek R1 output tokens are $2.5/1M versus $75/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek R1?: Claude Opus 4 has the lower time-to-first-token (390 ms vs 420 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Claude Opus 4 accepts 200k tokens versus 64k.
Can I self-host either model?: DeepSeek R1 is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Opus 4 and DeepSeek R1 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude Opus 4 matchups →|All DeepSeek R1 matchups →

Claude Opus 4 vs Claude 3 Opus (previous opus)Claude Opus 4 vs Claude Opus 4.5 (next opus)DeepSeek R1 vs DeepSeek V3 (previous deepseek)DeepSeek R1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (next deepseek)DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Claude Opus 4 Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4

Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek R1 benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Opus 4 (7)vsDeepSeek R1 (3)

Claude Opus 4: 7W (70%)Overall: Claude Opus 4DeepSeek R1: 3W (30%)

← Claude Opus 4DeepSeek R1 →

Claude Opus 4 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,490vs1,358

Coding Elo

1,502vs—

SWE-bench

72.5%vs65.2%

LiveBench

66.8%vs59%

GPQA Diamond

80.4%vs79.8%

Claude Opus 4: 5WDeepSeek R1: 0W

Tied (1/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

58 tok/svs62 tok/s

Time to first token

390 msvs420 ms

Claude Opus 4: 1WDeepSeek R1: 1W

DeepSeek R1 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$75/1Mvs$2.5/1M

Input price

$15/1Mvs$0.7/1M

Context window

200kvs64k

Claude Opus 4: 1WDeepSeek R1: 2W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude Opus 4

Higher SWE-bench (72.5%).

High-volume chatDeepSeek R1

Lower output list price ($2.5/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIClaude Opus 4

Lower TTFT (390 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude Opus 4

Larger window (200k).

Screenshots / visionClaude Opus 4

Claude Opus 4 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude Opus 4	Higher SWE-bench (72.5%).
High-volume chat	DeepSeek R1	Lower output list price ($2.5/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Claude Opus 4	Lower TTFT (390 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude Opus 4	Larger window (200k).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Opus 4	Claude Opus 4 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek R1?

Claude Opus 4 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,490). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek R1?

Claude Opus 4 leads SWE-bench at 72.5% vs 65.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

DeepSeek R1 output tokens are $2.5/1M versus $75/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek R1?

Claude Opus 4 has the lower time-to-first-token (390 ms vs 420 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude Opus 4 accepts 200k tokens versus 64k.

Can I self-host either model?

DeepSeek R1 is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Opus 4 and DeepSeek R1 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Claude Opus 4

DeepSeek R1

DeepSeek R1

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Opus 4

DeepSeek R1

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Claude Opus 4

DeepSeek R1

DeepSeek R1

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Opus 4

DeepSeek R1

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons