Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking #69 (Estimated); DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) #81 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) share 12 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking; 26 to DeepSeek V4 Pro (High).
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking only
- 4
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) only
- 26
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 6 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 Pro (High) has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5 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 | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | Δ | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)70.6 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)69.8 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)57.0 |
| Math | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)94.0 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot available | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot available | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot available | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking200K | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)1M | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 89.5% | 94.2% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 63.3% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.2% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 49% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 39.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1299 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 34.4% | Not comparable |
Coding8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 20.63% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 49.5% | 46.4% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| CodeforcesSource | — | 2919.0 | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 79.4% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 54.4% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 63.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 58.7% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.8% | 43.1% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 86.6% | 90.5% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 28.4% | 33.5% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 13.3% | -9.7% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 45.7% | 41.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 59.8% | 88.6% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 87.1% | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | — | 46.2% | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | — | 77.7% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 89.1% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 89.1% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 34.5% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | 91.3% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 58.0% | 71.3% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Pro (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 Opus 4.5 Thinking and DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) today?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High): $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
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.