Compare

Claude Opus 4.7 vs DeepSeek V4

Anthropic vs DeepSeek. Specs, benchmarks, and real per-task cost — all in one page.

Verdict

Claude Opus 4.7 leads on LMSYS ELO (1412 vs 1334). DeepSeek V4 is ~171.4× cheaper on a 3:1 input:output blend. DeepSeek V4 is open-weights, the other is proprietary.

Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.7

Anthropic’s frontier reasoning model. Leads SWE-Bench and holds top ranks on long-context coding and agentic workflows.

Best-in-class coding agent behaviorStrong instruction following1M-token context with high recallHigh reliability under tool use

DeepSeek

DeepSeek V4

The shock-the-market moment of 2026. Frontier coding quality at 1/50th the price of Opus.

Unbeatable $/qualityOpen weightsGreat at code

Pricing

Input / 1M$15.00$0.14

Output / 1M$75.00$0.28

Context1.0M128K

Max output64K16K

LicenseProprietaryOpen weights

Released2026-03-122026-02-20

Benchmarks

LMSYS ELO1412.01334.0

MMLU Pro92.885.4

HumanEval94.491.5

SWE-Bench72.154.1

MATH89.388.7

GPQA66.4—

MMMU79.2—

IFEval92.185.8

Per-task cost

Summarize a 1-hour meeting transcript$0.263$0.0022

Review a 500-line pull request$0.270$0.0017

Answer a customer support ticket$0.105$0.0006

Extract structured data from a resume$0.150$0.0010

Debug a stack trace with context$0.240$0.0014

Per-call cost using published token counts for each task. Real-world prompts vary.

Tool

Interactive compare →

Add up to four models, tweak tasks live.