Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)

Claude Opus 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#20); DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 1 category and DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.2 to 40.4.
  • DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6 and DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) specifications
Claude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Noometry Index58.240.3
Released2026-02-042024-05-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked6810

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): 40.4 (#139)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%—
LMArena WebDev1547—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
GSO41.2%—
WeirdML78%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—48.9%
LMArena Coding1536—
BigCodeBench Complete—59.4%
ALE-Bench996.5—
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24124.77
ARC-AGI-269.2%—
SimpleBench67.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
ARC-AGI-194%—
Chess Puzzles17%—
EnigmaEval7.6%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1527—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
DTBench91.2%—
LMCA55.8%—
BIG-Bench Hard—78.8%
ForecastBench60—
HellaSwag—87.1%
PIQA—83.9%
WinoGrande—86.3%

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%—
ProofBench50%—
LMArena Math1519—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
GPQA Diamond90.5%—
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%—
SimpleQA Verified47%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%—
LMArena Expert1546—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—92.2%
MMLU—78.4%
TriviaQA—80%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
LMArena Vision1316—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
LMArena Non-English1489—
LMArena Chinese1551—
LMArena French1513—
LMArena German1502—
LMArena Japanese1484—
LMArena Korean1464—
LMArena Russian1497—
LMArena Spanish1510—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
LMArena Instruction Following1523—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—
LMArena Longer Query1520—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024): —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)
LMArena Text1503—
LMArena Creative Writing1505—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1809—
EQ-Bench 41223—
LMArena Multi-Turn1513—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024)?

Claude Opus 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#20); DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 40.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-V2 (MoE-236B, May 2024) has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper