Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek V3.2
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Claude Opus 4 by Anthropic wins on 10 of 17 benchmarks against DeepSeek V3.2 by DeepSeek, which leads on 7. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, Claude Opus 4 scores 1375 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 1370, while Claude Opus 4 scores 83.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 82.0%.
Coding: In coding, Claude Opus 4 scores 90.0% on HumanEval+ compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 87.0%, while DeepSeek V3.2 scores 73.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Claude Opus 4's 72.5%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 60.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 55.0%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 1171 on Design Arena ELO compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 1154, while DeepSeek V3.2 scores 1187 on Website Arena ELO compared to Claude Opus 4's 1177.
Math: In math, Claude Opus 4 scores 86.0% on MATH compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 85.0%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 95.0% on GSM8K compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 94.0%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, Claude Opus 4 scores 79.6% on GPQA Diamond compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 78.9%, while Claude Opus 4 scores 45.0% on ARC-AGI compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 42.0%.
Context: In context, Claude Opus 4 scores 200K on Context Length compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 164K.
Pricing Comparison
Claude Opus 4 costs $15.0/1M input tokens and $75.0/1M output tokens, while DeepSeek V3.2 costs $0.27/1M input and $0.40/1M output. DeepSeek V3.2 is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
Claude Opus 4 generates output at 50 tok/s compared to DeepSeek V3.2's 70 tok/s, and the time to first token is 550 ms for Claude Opus 4 versus 400 ms for DeepSeek V3.2. DeepSeek V3.2 delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing general intelligence and math, Claude Opus 4 has the edge. For those who value coding and affordability and speed, DeepSeek V3.2 is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek V3.2 — FAQ
Which is better, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek V3.2?
Claude Opus 4 wins on more benchmarks overall (10 vs 7). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does Claude Opus 4 compare to DeepSeek V3.2 for coding?
DeepSeek V3.2 is better for coding, scoring 73.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 72.5%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is Claude Opus 4 cheaper than DeepSeek V3.2?
Yes, DeepSeek V3.2 is cheaper. Claude Opus 4 costs $15.0/1M input and $75.0/1M output tokens. DeepSeek V3.2 costs $0.27/1M input and $0.40/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4 or DeepSeek V3.2?
DeepSeek V3.2 is faster, generating output at 70 tok/s compared to 50 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the Claude Opus 4 vs DeepSeek V3.2 comparison cover?
This comparison covers 17 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MATH, SWE-bench Verified, GPQA Diamond, Output Speed, Time to First Token, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.