Claude Opus 4.6 vs DeepSeek R1
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Claude Opus 4.6 by Anthropic wins on 10 of 16 benchmarks against DeepSeek R1 by DeepSeek, which leads on 5. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from the AI Value Index.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, Claude Opus 4.6 scores 1496 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to DeepSeek R1's 1355, while DeepSeek R1 scores 84.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Claude Opus 4.6's 82.0%, while Claude Opus 4.6 scores 91.0% on IFEval compared to DeepSeek R1's 87.8%.
Coding: In coding, Claude Opus 4.6 scores 93.5% on HumanEval+ compared to DeepSeek R1's 86.0%, while Claude Opus 4.6 scores 80.8% on SWE-bench Verified compared to DeepSeek R1's 49.2%, while Claude Opus 4.6 scores 72.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to DeepSeek R1's 50.0%.
Math: In math, DeepSeek R1 scores 97.3% on MATH compared to Claude Opus 4.6's 92.0%, while both score 97.0% on GSM8K, while Claude Opus 4.6 scores 100.0% on AIME 2025 compared to DeepSeek R1's 79.8%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, Claude Opus 4.6 scores 91.3% on GPQA Diamond compared to DeepSeek R1's 71.5%, while Claude Opus 4.6 scores 60.0% on ARC-AGI compared to DeepSeek R1's 14.0%.
Context: In context, Claude Opus 4.6 scores 200K on Context Length compared to DeepSeek R1's 131K.
Pricing Comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.0/1M input tokens and $25.0/1M output tokens, while DeepSeek R1 costs $0.55/1M input and $2.2/1M output. DeepSeek R1 is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 generates output at 68 tok/s compared to DeepSeek R1's 35 tok/s, and the time to first token is 1680 ms for Claude Opus 4.6 versus 950 ms for DeepSeek R1. Claude Opus 4.6 delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing coding and general intelligence and speed, Claude Opus 4.6 has the edge. For those who value math and affordability, DeepSeek R1 is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
Claude Opus 4.6 vs DeepSeek R1 — FAQ
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.6 or DeepSeek R1?
Claude Opus 4.6 wins on more benchmarks overall (10 vs 5). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Claude Opus 4.6 compare to DeepSeek R1 for coding?
Claude Opus 4.6 is better for coding, scoring 80.8% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 49.2%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 cheaper than DeepSeek R1?
Yes, DeepSeek R1 is cheaper. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.0/1M input and $25.0/1M output tokens. DeepSeek R1 costs $0.55/1M input and $2.2/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.6 or DeepSeek R1?
Claude Opus 4.6 is faster, generating output at 68 tok/s compared to 35 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the Claude Opus 4.6 vs DeepSeek R1 comparison cover?
This comparison covers 16 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, IFEval, MATH, SWE-bench Verified, GPQA Diamond, Output Speed, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.