Claude Opus 4.5 vs DeepSeek-V3.2
Wins 5 of 7 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Following instructions
Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger all-rounder.DeepSeek-V3.2 is cheaper and better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 59 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software61Claude Opus 4.56 of 7 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking40Claude Opus 4.54 of 4 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up31Claude Opus 4.53 of 4 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math20Claude Opus 4.52 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts20Claude Opus 4.52 of 2 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01DeepSeek-V3.21 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own11Even1 each · 1 tie
Following instructions rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
DeepSeek-V3.2 costs 98% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Opus 4.5 pulls ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+37.5points ahead
- Long, multi-file coding tasks in real codebasesSWE-bench Pro+36.4points ahead
- Abstract visual puzzles that people can solveARC-AGI-2+33.6points ahead
Where DeepSeek-V3.2 pulls ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues in many programming languagesSWE-bench Multilingual+63.2points ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+14.4points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+2.7points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 59 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Opus 4.5
- SWE-bench MultilingualDeepSeek-V3.2 by 63.2770.2+63.2
- SWE-bench ProClaude Opus 4.5 by 36.45215.6+36.4
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.5 by 11.44735.6+11.4
- LMArena · WebDevClaude Opus 4.5 by 107 rating points14691362+107 rating
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.5 by 10.649.538.9+10.6
- SWE-bench VerifiedClaude Opus 4.5 by 7.880.973.1+7.8
- LiveCodeBench v6Claude Opus 4.5 by 1.584.883.3+1.5
AgentsEven
- GDPValClaude Opus 4.5 by 37.547.39.8+37.5
- BrowseCompDeepSeek-V3.2 by 14.43751.4+14.4
- MCP Atlastie62.362.2tie
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.5
- ARC-AGI-2Claude Opus 4.5 by 33.637.64+33.6
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.5 by 5.530.124.6+5.5
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.5 by 2.686.684+2.6
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.74.62.9+1.7
FactsClaude Opus 4.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.5 by 21.73917.3+21.7
- SimpleQA VerifiedClaude Opus 4.5 by 18.245.727.5+18.2
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.5 by 13.646.633+13.6
- Vectara HHEM hallucination ratelower is betterDeepSeek-V3.2 by 4.610.96.3+4.6
MathClaude Opus 4.5
- IMOAnswerBenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 5.78478.3+5.7
- HMMT Feb. 2026Claude Opus 4.5 by 1.285.384.1+1.2
- AIME 2026tie95.194.2tie
Long documentsClaude Opus 4.5
- LongBench v2Claude Opus 4.5 by 4.664.459.8+4.6
- AA-LCRClaude Opus 4.5 by 477.373.3+4
Following instructionsDeepSeek-V3.2
- IFBenchDeepSeek-V3.2 by 2.75860.7+2.7
Other results35 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- WideSearch (item-f1)Claude Opus 4.5 by 43.776.232.5+43.7
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Opus 4.5 by 41.359.618.3+41.3
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.5 by 36.514-22.5+36.5
- CyberGymClaude Opus 4.5 by 33.350.617.3+33.3
- PaperBenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 25.872.947.1+25.8
- ARC-AGI-1Claude Opus 4.5 by 258257+25
- Multi-SWE-BenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 19.45030.6+19.4
- SWT-benchClaude Opus 4.5 by 18.280.262+18.2
- τ²-BenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 17.998.280.3+17.9
- OJ-Bench (cpp)Claude Opus 4.5 by 16.454.638.2+16.4
- DeepSearchQA (F1)Claude Opus 4.5 by 15.276.160.9+15.2
- swe_bench_bashClaude Opus 4.5 by 14.474.460+14.4
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Claude Opus 4.5 by 12.959.346.4+12.9
- OctoCodingbenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 10.236.226+10.2
- BrowseComp (context management)DeepSeek-V3.2 by 9.857.867.6+9.8
- ToolathlonClaude Opus 4.5 by 8.343.535.2+8.3
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.5 by 7.629.121.5+7.6
- FinSearchCompT2&T3Claude Opus 4.5 by 7.166.259.1+7.1
- vectara_answer_rateClaude Opus 4.5 by 6.198.792.6+6.1
- vectara_avg_summary_lengthClaude Opus 4.5 by 52.5 rating points114.562+52.5 rating
- vectara_factual_consistencyDeepSeek-V3.2 by 4.689.193.7+4.6
- MMLU-ProClaude Opus 4.5 by 4.589.585+4.5
- SWE-PerfClaude Opus 4.5 by 3.84.70.9+3.8
- LiveCodeBenchClaude Opus 4.5 by 3.78783.3+3.7
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Opus 4.5 by 3.647.844.2+3.6
- HMMT Nov. 2025Claude Opus 4.5 by 3.393.390+3.3
- HLE (with tools)Claude Opus 4.5 by 2.443.240.8+2.4
- frontiermath_tier_4_v1Claude Opus 4.5 by 2.14.22.1+2.1
- MMLU-ReduxClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.995.693.7+1.9
- Seal-0DeepSeek-V3.2 by 1.847.749.5+1.8
- AIME25 no toolsClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.79189.3+1.7
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)DeepSeek-V3.2 by 1.189.590.6+1.1
- AIME 2026 I (Tools-allowed)tie93.392.7tie
- HMMT Feb. 2025tie92.992.5tie
- AIME 2025tie92.893.1tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or DeepSeek-V3.2?
Claude Opus 4.5 wins five of the seven areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts, math and long documents. DeepSeek-V3.2 wins following instructions, and costs 98% less. They are level on agents.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.5. It wins 6 of the 7 coding tests both models report; DeepSeek-V3.2 wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3.2 costs $0.28 and $0.42. That makes DeepSeek-V3.2 about 98% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 59 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 24 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 35 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.