Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)
Head-to-head evidence from 22 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) share 22 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 37 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 23 to DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max).
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 22
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 37
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) only
- 23
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Claude Opus 4.5 makes more sense if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) is the better fit if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 22 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Opus 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max). That is roughly 89.3x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
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 | Δ | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Opus 4.557.5 | Margin→ 37.3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)94.8 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.571.7 | Margin← 2.9 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)68.8 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.558.1 | Margin← 2.8 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)55.3 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.562.6 | Margin→ 1.2 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)63.8 |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.564.4 | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured |
| Multilingual | Claude Opus 4.585.7 | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.569.9 | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.569.5 | MarginNo overlap | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HMMT Feb 2026
MathA 85.3%B 94.8%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Δ 9.5HMMT Feb 2026: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 85.3%; DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 94.8%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 57.1%B 52.6%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 4.5SWE-bench Pro: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 57.1%; DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 52.6%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 30.8%B 34.8%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Δ 4HLE: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 30.8%; DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 34.8%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 89.5%B 86.2%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 3.3MMLU-Pro: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 89.5%; DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 86.2%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 59.3%B 56.9%Winner: Claude Opus 4.5Δ 2.4Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 59.3%; DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 56.9%. Claude Opus 4.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.546 tok/s | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.51.01 s | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5200K | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)1M | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins27 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.3% | 56.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.6% | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 23.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | 26.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | 47.8% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 42.3% | 69% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| MCP-TasksSource | 71.8% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 76.4% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 50.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | 95% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.23% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 32.3% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 45.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1189 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 31.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 34.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 831 | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 39.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 81.3% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 31.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 22.9% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 35.6% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.9% | 79% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 84.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.1% | 52.6% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 77.5% | 73.3% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| NL2RepoSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 47.0% | 44.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| CodeforcesSource | — | 3052.0 | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 56.9% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 56.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning6 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.5 wins17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | 88.1% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | 86.2% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 96.6% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 30.8% | 34.8% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 34.7% | 40.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.0% | 89.4% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 12.9% | 32.1% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -3.9% | -22.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.7% | 37.2% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.4% | 95.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 88.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | — | 34.1% | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | — | 78.9% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 88.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 50.0% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 95.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 93.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 85.3% | 94.8% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 84.0% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 20.690% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.167% | — | Not comparable |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | — | 88.4% | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | — | 33.0% | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | 74.3% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 68.5% | — | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 45.7% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 67.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 71.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1277 | 1238 | Claude Opus 4.5 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)?
Claude Opus 4.5 and DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.1 versus 55.3. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 68.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 94.8 versus 57.5. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.8 versus 62.6. Inside this category, MCP Atlas is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
- Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs DeepSeek V4 Pro Base
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Base
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash
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.