Model comparison

Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek-V3

Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3 costs 74× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 11, 2026. 41 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4 Anthropic

43.1

Rank #100 Confirmed

DeepSeek-V3

DeepSeek

39.5

Rank #166 Confirmed

Summary

They share 41 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 8 categories and DeepSeek-V3 in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4 leads 42.0 to 32.1.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 58.8% for Claude Opus 4 and 27.2% for DeepSeek-V3.
DeepSeek-V3 is cheaper at $0.24 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
Claude Opus 4 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 164K.
DeepSeek-V3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4 and DeepSeek-V3 specifications
	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
Provider	Anthropic	DeepSeek
Noometry Index	43.1	39.5
Released	2025-05-22	2024-12-26
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	200K	164K
Max output	32K	164K
Input $ / M tokens	$15	$0.24
Output $ / M tokens	$75	$0.90
Results tracked	56	60

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62), DeepSeek-V3: 42.3 (#106)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
Aider Polyglot	72%	55.1%
WeirdML	43.7%	36.1%
LMArena Coding	1442	1368
SWE-bench Verified	70.7%	—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)	67.6%	—
SciCode	—	35.8%
GSO	6.9%	—
BigCodeBench Instruct	—	50%
LiveBench Coding	—	70.9%
BigCodeBench Complete	—	62.2%
AlgoTune	1.33	—
HumanEval+	—	86.6%
MBPP+	—	73%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42), DeepSeek-V3: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
METR Time Horizons	63.9%	49.6%
Cybench	38%	—
DeepResearch Bench	46.8%	—
LMArena Search	1127	—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121), DeepSeek-V3: 20.5 (#236)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
SimpleBench	58.8%	27.2%
Kagi LLM Benchmark	74.3%	52.3%
CritPt	0.3%	0%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1399	1365
DTBench	81.6%	64.8%
LMCA	37.4%	15.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index	142.67	135.94
ForecastBench	61.1	59.1
ARC-AGI-2	8.6%	—
ARC-AGI-1	35.7%	—
EnigmaEval	5.6%	—
LiveBench Reasoning	—	65.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis	—	60.9%
BIG-Bench Hard	—	87.5%
HellaSwag	—	88.9%
LiveBench	—	66.9%
PIQA	—	84.7%
WinoGrande	—	85.2%

Math Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86), DeepSeek-V3: 32.1 (#219)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	64.4%	37.8%
Omni-MATH	61.6%	40.3%
LMArena Math	1390	1373
MATH Level 5	85%	75.5%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	4.5%	1.7%
LiveBench Math	—	73.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)	4.2%	—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88), DeepSeek-V3: 37.5 (#155)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
GPQA Diamond	76.3%	67.6%
MMLU-Pro	87.5%	72.3%
Confabulations	15.9%	26.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	12%	6.1%
GPQA (HELM)	70.8%	53.8%
LMArena Expert	1386	1351
Humanity's Last Exam	10.7%	—
ARC (AI2) Challenge	—	95.3%
MMLU	—	87.2%
TriviaQA	—	82.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106), DeepSeek-V3: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
LMArena Vision	1192	—
GeoBench	49%	—
VPCT	38%	—

Multilingual Too close to call

Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138), DeepSeek-V3: 48.5 (#143)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
LMArena Non-English	1362	1358
LMArena Chinese	1386	1391
LMArena French	1372	1385
LMArena German	1391	1374
LMArena Japanese	1331	1333
LMArena Korean	1321	1319
LMArena Russian	1392	1373
LMArena Spanish	1389	1358

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28), DeepSeek-V3: 72.8 (#130)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
IFEval	91.8%	83.2%
LMArena Instruction Following	1406	1345
LiveBench Instruction Following	—	81.5%

Long Context Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172), DeepSeek-V3: 34.0 (#253)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
Fiction.LiveBench	61.1%	50%
LMArena Longer Query	1422	1352

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads

Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89), DeepSeek-V3: 57.4 (#130)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Claude Opus 4	DeepSeek-V3
LMArena Text	1377	1375
LMArena Creative Writing	1387	1364
Short-Story Creative Writing	83.6%	77%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1580	1472
WildBench	85.2%	83%
LMArena Multi-Turn	1396	1389
LiveBench Language	—	49.1%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4 better than DeepSeek-V3?

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek-V3?

DeepSeek-V3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.24 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek-V3 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 versus 42.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4 does, with 200K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and DeepSeek-V3 share?

41 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-V3 has 60.