# Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek-V3

> Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3 costs 74× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-deepseek-v3
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 30

## Summary

- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and DeepSeek-V3 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 31.6 to 20.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 60% for Claude Opus 4.1 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 4.1.
- Claude Opus 4.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 164K.
- DeepSeek-V3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 39.2 |
| Rank | 136 | 157 |
| Context | 200K | 164K |
| Input $/M | $15 | $0.24 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $0.90 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69)
- DeepSeek-V3: 41.9 (#99)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 45.9% | 36.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1368 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 55.1% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| SciCode | — | 35.8% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 50% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 70.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 62.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 86.6% |
| MBPP+ | — | 73% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38)
- DeepSeek-V3: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | 49.6% |
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70)
- DeepSeek-V3: 20.0 (#226)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 60% | 27.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1365 |
| DTBench | 80% | 64.8% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 15.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | 135.95 |
| ForecastBench | 62 | 59.1 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 52.3% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 65.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| 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 4.1: 22.0 (#267)
- DeepSeek-V3: 30.4 (#208)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | 37.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1373 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | 1.7% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 40.3% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 73.5% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 75.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93)
- DeepSeek-V3: 37.5 (#147)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | 67.6% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | 26.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | 6.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1352 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 72.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 53.8% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 95.3% |
| MMLU | — | 87.2% |
| TriviaQA | — | 82.9% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114)
- DeepSeek-V3: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90)
- DeepSeek-V3: 48.8 (#138)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1390 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1386 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1374 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1333 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1321 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1372 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1358 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53)
- DeepSeek-V3: 73.0 (#125)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1345 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |
| IFEval | — | 83.2% |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60)
- DeepSeek-V3: 34.0 (#248)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1353 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 50% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70)
- DeepSeek-V3: 57.6 (#124)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | DeepSeek-V3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1375 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | 77% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1389 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1472 |
| WildBench | — | 83% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 49.1% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than DeepSeek-V3?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3 costs 74× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 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 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 or DeepSeek-V3 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 41.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and DeepSeek-V3 share?

30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-V3 has 60.