← ModelRumors.ai buyer's guide

HEAD TO HEAD · UPDATED NOV 6, 2026

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1-Flash

Anthropic against DeepSeek, on sourced numbers only. Green marks the higher (or cheaper) value on each row; the text below only calls a lead when the gap is bigger than measurement noise.

Claude Sonnet 5.5DeepSeek V4.1-Flash
Arena Elo1477 source ↗1476 source ↗
GPQA Diamond95.6% source ↗90.9% source ↗
$ per 1M in / out$2 / $10 source ↗$0.15 / $0.60 source ↗
Blended $ per 1M (3:1)$4.00 source ↗$0.26 source ↗
Context window1M source ↗1M source ↗
Output speed155 tok/s source ↗174 tok/s source ↗
ReleasedSep 28, 2026 source ↗Sep 10, 2026 source ↗
Open weightsNo source ↗Yes source ↗
Reasoning effort tierslow · medium · high · xhigh · max (default: high)low · high · max (default: high)
API effort controloutput_config={"effort": "low" | "medium" | "high" | "xhigh" | "max"} source ↗thinking={"type": "enabled" | "disabled"}, reasoning_effort="low" | "high" | "max" (medium and xhigh map to high) source ↗
Additional benchmarksSWE-bench Pro: 81.3% source ↗
AA Intelligence Index v5.0.1: 55 source ↗
DeepSWE v1.1: 77.0% (Oct 17 update; 74.2% on Sep 10) source ↗
Best for (workload)Fast (155 tok/s, Artificial Analysis) and strong on science: 95.6% GPQA Diamond at max effort (Epoch AI), above Opus 5.5's 90.6%. source ↗Fastest output we track (174 tok/s, Artificial Analysis) and the lowest list price ($0.15 / $0.60 off-peak); MIT open weights. source ↗

Arena Elo from the arena.ai text leaderboard as of Oct 27, 2026 source ↗. Speed measured by Artificial Analysis and varies by provider.

Which one should I use?

For high-volume work where cost matters most, DeepSeek V4.1-Flash is about 15.2 times cheaper per token. For hard science and analysis questions, Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on GPQA Diamond (95.6% vs 90.9%). If you need to self-host or fine-tune, only DeepSeek V4.1-Flash has open weights. On release timing, Anthropic is at day 30 of a typical ~15-day gap (PAST TYPICAL GAP), and DeepSeek is at day 20 of a typical ~32-day gap (MID-CYCLE).

Key differences from the sourced numbers

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or DeepSeek V4.1-Flash better?

DeepSeek V4.1-Flash is the cheaper option: $0.26 vs $4.00 per 1M tokens at a 3:1 input-to-output mix (about 15.2 times less). On the Arena text leaderboard they are close (1477 vs 1476): a gap under 20 points is within the leaderboard's margin of error. On GPQA Diamond, graduate-level science questions, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 95.6% to 90.9%. Claude Sonnet 5.5 pricing note: Same rate across the full 1M context window. DeepSeek V4.1-Flash pricing note: Off-peak price (cache hit $0.003 / 1M). Peak hours (01:00 to 04:00 and 06:00 to 10:00 UTC, weekdays): $0.30 / $1.20 (cache hit $0.006 / 1M).

Which one should I use: Claude Sonnet 5.5 or DeepSeek V4.1-Flash?

For high-volume work where cost matters most, DeepSeek V4.1-Flash is about 15.2 times cheaper per token. For hard science and analysis questions, Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on GPQA Diamond (95.6% vs 90.9%). If you need to self-host or fine-tune, only DeepSeek V4.1-Flash has open weights. On release timing, Anthropic is at day 30 of a typical ~15-day gap (PAST TYPICAL GAP), and DeepSeek is at day 20 of a typical ~32-day gap (MID-CYCLE).

How much does Claude Sonnet 5.5 cost compared with DeepSeek V4.1-Flash?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 lists at $2 / $10 per 1M input/output tokens ($4.00/1M blended at 3:1). DeepSeek V4.1-Flash lists at $0.15 / $0.60 per 1M input/output tokens ($0.26/1M blended at 3:1).

Anthropic lab hub →DeepSeek lab hub → Compare by effort level & use case → Compare any two models

Facts checked Nov 5, 2026 against official sources. Every number links to its source. Spotted an error? Email [email protected].