Compare AI models: Claude Opus 5 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash
- Claude Opus 5AnthropicHollow points use fallbacks · hover for details
- DeepSeek V4 FlashDeepSeek
ReasoningCodingCost efficiencyContext windowMultimodalTool use
| Model | Reasoning | Coding | Cost efficiency | Context window | Multimodal | Tool use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 5 | 95/100 | 100/100 | 6/100 | 81/100 | 50/100 | 50/100 — Tool calling supported; no comparable benchmark |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 26/100 | 73/100 | 68/100 | 81/100 | 0/100 | 0/100 |
Overview
Author
Context length
1M
1M
Reasoning
True
True
Input modalities
Text, Image, Pdf
Text
Output modalities
Text
Text
Providers
Pricing
Input
$5.00/ 1M
$0.15/ 1M
Output
$25/ 1M
$0.60/ 1M
Cached input
$0.50/ 1M
$0.003/ 1M
MomentumLast 2 mo
Unique users
0
1.6M
Completed sessions
43
23,059,516
Token share
0%
6.32%
Tokens
00%
77T-72%
No trend data
SEP 4OCT 29
RetentionWeek 1
Returning users
Pending
63.1%139K user-weeks
Related comparisons. Other model pairs to check.
Nearby alternativeClaude Opus 5 vs Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructClaude Opus 5·Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructNearby alternativeDeepSeek V4 Flash vs Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructDeepSeek V4 Flash·Dracarys Llama 3.1 70B InstructRelated comparisonClaude Opus 5 vs Jamba MiniClaude Opus 5·Jamba MiniRelated comparisonDeepSeek V4 Flash vs Jamba MiniDeepSeek V4 Flash·Jamba Mini