Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek V3.1
Claude Opus 4.1 leads DeepSeek V3.1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 13.7, and DeepSeek V3.1 costs 50.0x less per output token ($1.50 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 10 benchmarks have a result for both.
Claude Opus 4.1 or DeepSeek V3.1: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 164K tokens) and work measured by DTBench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 10
- Claude Opus 4.1 only
- 63
- DeepSeek V3.1 only
- 1
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Claude Opus 4.1
Claude Opus 4.1 leads, 22.8 against 13.7.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.1 has a GPQA Diamond result, 76.3%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.1 has a AIME result, 78.2%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.1 has a MMLU Pro result, 87.9%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Claude Opus 4.1
Claude Opus 4.1 leads, 1176 against 1122.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Claude Opus 4.1
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens against 164K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
DeepSeek V3.1
Claude Opus 4.1 $0.052, DeepSeek V3.1 $0.0013 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked, DeepSeek V3.1 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Web design, 10.8 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Design Arena: SVG: Claude Opus 4.1 1152 against DeepSeek V3.1 967, 23.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against DeepSeek V3.1 $1.50 per million output tokens, 50.0x apart.
- Context window
- Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, DeepSeek V3.1 164K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Claude Opus 4.1 | Bars | DeepSeek V3.1 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Web design | 7 | 0 | ||
| General | 1 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 9 | 1 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 66.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 38.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Cybench | 42.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1479 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1456 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1399 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| SciCode | 4.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 22.8 | 13.7 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.1 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| METR time horizons | 66.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| GDPval | 43.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 77.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 77.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| SimpleBench | 60.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 21.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| EBR-bench | 7.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| VPCT | 35.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1442 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1438 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1451 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Not measured | 53.2% | Only DeepSeek V3.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 78.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 95.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 94.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 68.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 12.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 2.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1431 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1434 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 87.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 83.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 73.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 61.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 93.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 47.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1422 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1416 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1421 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1406 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | 40.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1176 | 1122 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1162 | 1085 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1171 | 1084 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1166 | 1096 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1152 | 1077 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1170 | 1112 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1152 | 967 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1167 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 31.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 73.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| DTBench | 80.0% | 82.7% | DeepSeek V3.1 |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 24.3% | Claude Opus 4.1 |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 84.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1419 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1435 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1412 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1433 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1405 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1427 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1413 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1377 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1381 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1433 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1448 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1422 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1413 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1444 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1455 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1418 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1398 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
DeepSeek V3.1 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
DeepSeek V3.1 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
DeepSeek V3.1 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Anthropic Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek V3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | August 5, 2025 | August 21, 2025 |
| Context window | 200K | 164K |
| Input $/Mtok | $15.00 | $0.55 |
| Output $/Mtok | $75.00 | $1.50 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than DeepSeek V3.1 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Claude Opus 4.1 for a larger context window (200K against 164K tokens) and work measured by DTBench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or DeepSeek V3.1?
Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.55 and $1.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or DeepSeek V3.1?
Claude Opus 4.1, with 200K tokens against 164K.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek V3.1 comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and DeepSeek V3.1's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.