New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

Claude Opus 5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

vs

Which one, when

Both models share a 1000000-token context window and take text plus image in, text out, so the real split is price and output length: deepseek-v4.1-flash costs $0.3 input and $1.2 output against $5 and $25 for claude-opus-5, roughly 17x cheaper on input and about 21x on output, with cache reads at $0.03 versus $0.5. Pick deepseek-v4.1-flash for high-volume or long-form work, since it also allows up to 393216 output tokens versus 128000. Pick claude-opus-5 when you want its explicit thinking mode, which can also be disabled, on top of chat, code, tools and reasoning.

Benchmarks

LeadsAbove averageNo peer higherClaude Opus 51033 / 3610 / 36DeepSeek V4.1 Flash516 / 194 / 19

15 measured on both.

Claude Opus 5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash other models measured peer average no peer scored higher
NL2Repo
no peer scored higher 75.3%
64%
BioMysteryBench hard
49.4%
N/A
OSWorld 2.0
no peer scored higher 70.6%
N/A
ExploitGym
22.1%
15.3%
HealthBench Professional
59.8%
N/A
Finance Agent v2
58.6%
N/A
Legal Agent Benchmark
6.7%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
93.4%
90.9%
Agents' Last Exam
28.6%
31.8%
BabyVision with tools
no peer scored higher 94.1%
89.6%

Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

Pricing

Claude Opus 5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Δ
Input / 1M tokens $5 $0.3 17×
Output / 1M tokens $25 $1.2 21×
Cache read / 1M tokens $0.5 $0.03 17×
Cache write 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) no separate charge -

Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.

Where they sit - input price per 1M tokens across all 69 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

Capabilities

Claude Opus 5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Tool use yes yes
Thinking control configurable yes - vendor dial not published
Structured output yes -
Prompt caching explicit (you mark the prefix) implicit (automatic)
Cache lifetime 5m default, 1h option no fixed TTL (evicted when unused)
Minimum cached prefix 1024 tokens not published

Specs

Claude Opus 5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Input modalities text image text image
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-07-24 2026-09-10
Knowledge cutoff 2026-05 -
Context window 1M 1M
Max output 128K 393K
Thinking parameter
  • thinking.type
  • output_config.effort
-
Accepted values
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
-
Default

thinking on

effort
  • high (Claude API and Claude Code)
-

Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: Claude Opus 5 · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

Claude Opus 5 passed · 3 sentences

When reasoning is enabled, the model generates a hidden chain of "thinking" tokens before it writes the visible answer, and those internal tokens are billed at the output rate even though no one ever sees them — commonly 3–10x more tokens than the response itself. Because output tokens are priced several times higher than input tokens, that added volume hits us at our most expensive rate, which is why the bill roughly doubled while our request count stayed flat. The spend is controllable: we can cap the reasoning budget per call, route only genuinely hard requests to reasoning mode and cheaper models for the rest, and track cost per successfully completed task rather than cost per token, since a single correct answer usually beats three cheap retries plus human cleanup.

out 529 tok latency 9.0 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning changed the unit economics: the model now spends extra billable tokens internally to “think” before producing the answer, and those reasoning tokens are charged like output tokens even though users never see them. That added token generation—plus longer contexts and occasional retries on harder prompts—roughly doubled our cost per request. We can control this by capping reasoning depth, routing only complex queries to reasoning models, and caching common prompts to bring the bill back down.

out 423 tok (+327 thinking) latency 14.6 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences - countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

Claude Opus 5 passed · 8/8 cases

## Fixed version ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 if cur > best: best = cur return best ``` ## The bug The counters were tracking the wrong quantity: `cur` counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *elements in the current run*, and both counters started at `0` instead of `1`. Since a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* adjacent equal pairs, every result came back one too small — `[1, 1]` returned 1, `[3, 3, 3]` returned 2 — and a single-element list returned 0 because the loop body never executed and `best` kept its initial value of `0`. […]

out 1094 tok latency 16.1 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that `cur` is counting equal adjacent pairs, not elements in the current run: every time `xs[i] == xs[i - 1]`, the run length increases by one element, but the first element of the run was never counted, so all runs are undercounted by one. Also, `best` starts at `0`, so single-element inputs return `0` instead of `1`, and a one-element run ending at the last index is missed entirely.

out 918 tok (+733 thinking) latency 11.4 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

Claude Opus 5 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: - **quarter**: "September quarter" is labeled Q3 because the text refers to an upcoming "Q4 close," implying a calendar-aligned fiscal year. No fiscal year is given. - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is stated as constant-currency and hedged ("call it"), so it's approximate; the currency is not explicitly stated as USD. - **growth_pct**: "up eleven and change" means slightly more than 11, so 11 is a floor rather than an exact figure.

out 539 tok latency 7.6 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11.0,"guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

out 1707 tok (+1667 thinking) latency 15.1 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

Claude Opus 5 passed · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** We're introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching in the API Gateway. Repeated system prompts, long documents, and few-shot examples are stored once at the gateway layer and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Instead of paying full input token costs on every request, your application sends a cache reference, and the gateway rehydrates the context before forwarding it downstream. Why does that matter? Teams running high-volume agents and retrieval pipelines typically see input token spend fall 40 to 70 percent, with median latency dropping by several hundred milliseconds. Caches are scoped per project, encrypted at rest, and invalidated automatically when a prompt template changes. Enable it with a single header, and see the docs for TTL tuning and per-route controls.

out 1593 tok latency 19.1 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 116 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Cache for our API gateway. It stores identical prompt requests and their responses across supported model providers, then serves cached results when a match is found. Teams can cut duplicate inference costs, reduce latency, and keep behavior consistent during provider failover. The cache works with configurable TTLs, per-route rules, and cache-key controls, so you decide what is reusable and what must stay fresh. Does your application send the same prompts to multiple providers? Now your gateway can answer many of those calls without another upstream request. Existing observability dashboards show hit rates, saved tokens, and estimated spend reduction. Enable it in the gateway console, set your policy, and start caching today.

out 917 tok (+770 thinking) latency 9.0 s

Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.

Switch between them with one line

Both ids are in every tab below - the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-opus-5",
    # model="deepseek-v4.1-flash",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get your API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.3 vs $5, 17× apart). Other rows may point the other way - the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.

Can I A/B test Claude Opus 5 against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key - switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Do Claude Opus 5 and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash support prompt caching?

Yes - both bill cached reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies