LIVE
ANTHROPICOpus 4.7 benchmarks published2m ago
CLAUDEOK142ms
OPUS 4.7$15 / $75per Mtok
CHATGPTOK89ms
HACKERNEWSWhy has not AI improved design quality the way it improved dev speed?14m ago
MMLU-PROleader Opus 4.788.4
GEMINIDEGRADED312ms
MISTRALMistral Medium 3 released6m ago
GPT-4o$5 / $15per Mtok
ARXIVCompositional reasoning in LRMs22m ago
BEDROCKOK178ms
GEMINI 2.5$3.50 / $10.50per Mtok
THE VERGEFrontier Model Forum expansion announced38m ago
SWE-BENCHleader Claude Opus 4.772.1%
MISTRALOK104ms
ANTHROPICOpus 4.7 benchmarks published2m ago
CLAUDEOK142ms
OPUS 4.7$15 / $75per Mtok
CHATGPTOK89ms
HACKERNEWSWhy has not AI improved design quality the way it improved dev speed?14m ago
MMLU-PROleader Opus 4.788.4
GEMINIDEGRADED312ms
MISTRALMistral Medium 3 released6m ago
GPT-4o$5 / $15per Mtok
ARXIVCompositional reasoning in LRMs22m ago
BEDROCKOK178ms
GEMINI 2.5$3.50 / $10.50per Mtok
THE VERGEFrontier Model Forum expansion announced38m ago
SWE-BENCHleader Claude Opus 4.772.1%
MISTRALOK104ms

Claude Opus 4.7 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro

DeepSeek V4 Pro is the model that forced everyone to take open-weight Chinese LLMs seriously. It scores within 2-3 points of Claude Opus 4.7 on most benchmarks, ships under MIT license, and prices at roughly 1/10th of Opus on the API. The tradeoff: Opus still leads on the hardest reasoning, agentic tool use, and English-language code; V4 Pro wins on cost, weight access, and self-hosting flexibility.

Head-to-Head Specs

SpecClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek V4 Pro
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Input Price$15.00/1M$1.74/1M
Output Price$75.00/1M$3.48/1M
Context Window1M1M
Released2026-042026-04
Capabilitiestext, vision, tool-use, codetext, vision, code, reasoning

Benchmark Scores

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek V4 ProWinner
MMLU-Pro93.891.5Claude
HumanEval96.294.8Claude
GPQA Diamond76.573.1Claude
MATH93.192.4Claude
SWE-bench65.463.8Claude

See the full benchmark leaderboard for all models.

Category Breakdown

General reasoning (MMLU-Pro)Claude Opus 4.7

Opus 4.7 at 93.8 vs V4 Pro at 91.5. Close.

Code generation (HumanEval)Claude Opus 4.7

Opus 4.7 at 96.2 vs V4 Pro at 94.8

SWE-benchClaude Opus 4.7

Opus 4.7 at 65.4 vs V4 Pro at 63.8

Graduate-level science (GPQA)Claude Opus 4.7

Opus 4.7 at 76.5 vs V4 Pro at 73.1

MathTieTie

Opus 4.7 at 93.1 vs V4 Pro at 92.4. Within noise.

PricingDeepSeek V4 Pro

V4 Pro at $1.74/$3.48 vs Opus at $15/$75. ~10x cheaper input, ~20x cheaper output.

LicenseDeepSeek V4 Pro

V4 Pro is MIT-licensed open weights; Opus is closed API only.

Context windowTieTie

Both ship 1M token native context.

Choose Claude Opus 4.7 when:

  • Maximum benchmark quality regardless of cost
  • Strongest agentic tool use and long-running workflows
  • Existing Anthropic integration and ecosystem
  • Closed-API trust model preferred over self-hosting
View Claude Opus 4.7 details

Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro when:

  • High-volume workloads where cost dominates
  • Self-hosted or on-prem deployments where weights matter
  • Fine-tuning for specialized domains
  • Frontier-class quality at fraction of frontier price
View DeepSeek V4 Pro details

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 4.7 from Anthropic excels at maximum benchmark quality regardless of cost, while DeepSeek V4 Pro from DeepSeek is better for high-volume workloads where cost dominates. See the full comparison above for detailed benchmarks and pricing.

How much does Claude Opus 4.7 cost compared to DeepSeek V4 Pro?

Claude Opus 4.7 costs $15.00 input and $75.00 output per 1M tokens. DeepSeek V4 Pro costs $1.74 input and $3.48 output per 1M tokens.

What is the context window difference between Claude Opus 4.7 and DeepSeek V4 Pro?

Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1M tokens, while DeepSeek V4 Pro supports 1M tokens.

More Comparisons

Interactive Compare ToolAll ModelsFull Pricing Guide