Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking vs DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 8 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

36.55/100
Margin
17.4pts
winning →
53.95/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking #184 (Supported); DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) #92 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) share 8 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking; 30 to DeepSeek V4 Flash (High).

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
8
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking only
1
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only
30
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 8 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)
CategoryClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingΔDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)
AgenticClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)55.3
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)68.5
KnowledgeClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)52.1
MathClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)91.9

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot availableDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)$0.14 input / $0.28 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking29 tok/sDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking15.00 sDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking200KDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)1MDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 71.4%95.6%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 53.5%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 40.3%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 67.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 43.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 28.2%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 32.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1147Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Result
AA-SciCodeSource 40.9%42.0%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
CodeforcesSource 2816.0Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 78.6%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 52.3%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 70.2%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 52.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Result
AA-LCRSource 66.3%62.7%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
CritPtSource 0.0%3.4%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
MRCR 1MSource 76.9%Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 59.3%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 33.7%37.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 80.9%86.7%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-HLESource 11.9%27.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
MMLU-ProSource 86.4%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 28.9%Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 73.2%Not comparable
GPQASource 87.4%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 87.4%Not comparable
HLESource 29.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -22.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 35.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 89.7%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source 91.9%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 85.1%Not comparable
ApexSource 19.1%Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 72.1%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 67.9%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1238Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Result
AA-IFBenchSource 55.4%73.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) today?

Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking: Pricing unavailable DeepSeek V4 Flash (High): $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.