Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek V3.2

Claude Opus 4.1 leads DeepSeek V3.2 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 21.5, and DeepSeek V3.2 costs 85.2x less per output token ($0.88 vs $75.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 51 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Claude Opus 4.1 Replace DeepSeek V3.2
Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Coding
No data
Overall
50.2
Output $/M
$75.00
31
DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek
Coding
30.0
Overall
37.9
Output $/M
$0.88
20
vs boards won of 51 shared

Claude Opus 4.1 or DeepSeek V3.2: which to pick

Only DeepSeek V3.2 has a coding score, 30.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Claude Opus 4.1 has none, 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 LMArena WebDev or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model AClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BDeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek30.0/1003 independent benchmarks$0.99 per solved task
Shared results
51
Claude Opus 4.1 only
22
DeepSeek V3.2 only
24
Like-for-like categories
7 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.1 not benchmarked, DeepSeek V3.2 30.0 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 5.0 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: SVG: Claude Opus 4.1 1152 against DeepSeek V3.2 1032, 15.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.1 $75.00 against DeepSeek V3.2 $0.88 per million output tokens, 85.2x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.1 takes 200K tokens, DeepSeek V3.2 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.1BarsDeepSeek V3.2Ties
Coding42
Intelligence11
Reasoning31
Math13
Knowledge35
Web design80
General118
All shared boards3120
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index42
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured70.0%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured59.0%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena WebDev13901362Claude Opus 4.1
AA Coding IndexNot measured44.2Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)66.5%80.7%DeepSeek V3.2
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured67.6%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured5.1%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured86.2%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured35.6%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Terminal-Bench38.0%39.6%DeepSeek V3.2
WeirdML45.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Cybench42.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding14791453Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14561449Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1350Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13991371Claude Opus 4.1
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
AA Intelligence Index22.821.5Claude Opus 4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index144.1146.1DeepSeek V3.2
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured90.6%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured21.3%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
METR time horizons66.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GDPval43.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
DeepResearch Bench48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$1,034Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
GPQA Diamond76.3%80.3%DeepSeek V3.2
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)77.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.0%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured24.6%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
ARC-AGINot measured57.0%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured4.0%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SimpleBench60.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles21.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
EBR-bench7.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
VPCT35.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14421434Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: expert14381436Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14511446Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
AIME78.2%84.6%DeepSeek V3.2
MATH 500 (Vals AI)95.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.4%86.0%Claude Opus 4.1
AA Math IndexNot measured92.0Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured92.0%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
OTIS Mock AIME68.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 312.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tier 42.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
LMArena Text: math14311435DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: mathematical work14341440DeepSeek V3.2
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index35
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
MMLU Pro87.9%84.9%Claude Opus 4.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.5%76.1%Claude Opus 4.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured55.4%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured51.0%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.7%68.2%Claude Opus 4.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.6%93.9%DeepSeek V3.2
MedCode (Vals AI)47.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured86.2%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: science14221446DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14161440DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: legal and government14211425DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: business and finance14061410DeepSeek V3.2
FACTS Benchmark Suite40.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index80
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
Design Arena: websites11771175Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: UI components11651149Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: game dev11711132Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: data viz11661158Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: 3D11531133Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: all code categories11711164Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: SVG11521032Claude Opus 4.1
Design Arena: ASCII art11671083Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index118
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)31.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)73.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
IFBenchNot measured60.7%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured73.3%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
DTBench80.0%85.6%DeepSeek V3.2
LMCA37.1%28.8%Claude Opus 4.1
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)84.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.1 measured
CL-benchNot measured12.4%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured7.4%Only DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text14191425DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: instruction following14351413Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14121400Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: English14331439DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: non-English14051409DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: Chinese14271455DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: German14131413DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: Japanese13771374Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Korean13811370Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: French14331429Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Spanish14481424Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: Russian14221424DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: Polish14131419DeepSeek V3.2
LMArena Text: multi-turn14441427Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14551428Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14181407Claude Opus 4.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13981395Claude Opus 4.1
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2Leader
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

Claude Opus 4.1$0.052Fits in one request
DeepSeek V3.2$0.0007Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$0.975Fits in one request
DeepSeek V3.2$0.017Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.1$3.75Exceeds the context window
DeepSeek V3.2$0.067Exceeds the context window

DeepSeek V3.2 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.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek V3.2
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.1DeepSeek V3.2
MakerAnthropicDeepSeek
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025December 1, 2025
Context window200K164K
Input $/Mtok$15.00$0.29
Output $/Mtok$75.00$0.88
Coding indexNot benchmarked30.0
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.99
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than DeepSeek V3.2 for coding?

Only DeepSeek V3.2 has a coding score, 30.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Claude Opus 4.1 has none, 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 LMArena WebDev or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or DeepSeek V3.2?

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V3.2 costs $0.29 and $0.88. Cost per solved task is known for DeepSeek V3.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.1 or DeepSeek V3.2?

Claude Opus 4.1, with 200K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek V3.2 comparison based on?

51 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and DeepSeek V3.2's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next