Model comparison
Claude 4 Sonnet vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4 Sonnet #158 (Supported); DeepSeek V4 Pro #46 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4 Sonnet and DeepSeek V4 Pro share 3 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Claude 4 Sonnet; 20 to DeepSeek V4 Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- Claude 4 Sonnet only
- 13
- DeepSeek V4 Pro only
- 20
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
DeepSeek V4 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 60.66 to 42.79. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude 4 Sonnet is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro. That is roughly 17.2x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4 Sonnet.
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 | Claude 4 Sonnet | Δ | DeepSeek V4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4 Sonnet72.7 | Margin← 7.4 | DeepSeek V4 Pro65.3 |
| Agentic | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro59.1 |
| Knowledge | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro41.3 |
| Math | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro31.7 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 72.7%B 73.6%Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProΔ 0.9SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4 Sonnet scored 72.7%; DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 73.6%. DeepSeek V4 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4 Sonnet | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4 Sonnet$3 input / $15 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro$0.435 input / $0.87 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4 Sonnet40 tok/s | DeepSeek V4 ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4 Sonnet1.33 s | DeepSeek V4 ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4 Sonnet200K | DeepSeek V4 Pro1M | DeepSeek V4 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 39.66% | 50.28% | DeepSeek V4 Pro leads |
| JobBenchSource | 18.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 59.1% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 69.4% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 46.3% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 59.8% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 17.1% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 68.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 4.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -9.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 22.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 40.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 82.9% | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | — | 45% | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 7.7% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 45.4% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude 4 Sonnet or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.66 to 42.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72.7% and 73.6%.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4 Sonnet or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
Claude 4 Sonnet has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.7 versus 65.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
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.