Which model is better: Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro is 67.0% cheaper for input tokens ($1.32 vs. $4.00 per 1M tokens) and $3.96 vs. $20.00 for output tokens (3.0x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, DeepSeek V4 Pro delivers lower response latency at 520ms TTFT (160ms faster than Claude Opus 5.5) with 78 vs. 95 tok/s throughput. Claude Opus 5.5 leads coding evaluations at 89.9% SWE-bench Verified vs. 80.6% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 93.2% vs. 90.1% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude Opus 5.5
DeepSeek V4 Pro
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$4.00
$1.32
DeepSeek V4 Pro is 3.0x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$20.00
$3.96
DeepSeek V4 Pro (80.2% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.200
$0.145
DeepSeek V4 Pro is 1.4x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$5.00
$1.32
DeepSeek V4 Pro is 3.8x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
1,024k (128k out)
1,024k (128k out)
Equal Context Window
Avg TTFT Response Latency
680ms
520ms
DeepSeek V4 Pro (160ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
95 tok/s
78 tok/s
Claude Opus 5.5 (+17 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
89.9%
80.6%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+9.3% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
93.2%
90.1%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+3.1% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
92.1%
88.4%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+3.7% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98%
97.3%
Claude Opus 5.5 (+0.7% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
57.8 / 100
67 / 100
DeepSeek V4 Pro (+9.2 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
Which is cheaper: Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro is cheaper at $1.32/1M input tokens ($3.96/1M output) compared to $4.00/1M input ($20.00/1M output) for Claude Opus 5.5.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro delivers faster first-token latency at 520ms TTFT (78 tok/s throughput) compared to 680ms TTFT (95 tok/s) for Claude Opus 5.5.
How do Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 89.9% versus 80.6% for DeepSeek V4 Pro. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude Opus 5.5 scores 93.2% versus 90.1% for DeepSeek V4 Pro (and 98% vs 97.3% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude Opus 5.5?
Choose Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) for top-ranked frontier intelligence leader for autonomous multi-step agentic coding, repository-scale migrations, and complex scientific reasoning at a 40% lower workload cost than Opus 5 — offering a 1,024k context window, 680ms TTFT, and $4.00/1M input pricing ($0.200/1M cached reads).
When should you choose DeepSeek V4 Pro?
Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro (DeepSeek) for open-weight 1.6T MoE powerhouse designed for cost-effective full-repository code generation, mathematical reasoning, and persistent chain-of-thought multi-step agent workflows — offering a 1,024k context window, 520ms TTFT, and $1.32/1M input pricing ($0.145/1M cached reads).
