Claude Opus 4.7 vs DeepSeek V4 for coding
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger coder of the two on benchmarks, but DeepSeek V4 can be the better pick when cost, speed, or context window matter more. Below: a side-by-side spec table and exactly when to pick each.
At a glance
| Spec | Claude Opus 4.7 | DeepSeek V4 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Released | Nov 2025 | Nov 2025 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 72% | 63% |
| HumanEval | 94% | 92% |
| MMLU | 88% | 86% |
| Context window | 200K | 256K |
| Max output | 32K | 16K |
| Input price (per 1M) | $15 | $0.27 |
| Output price (per 1M) | $75 | $1.10 |
| Price tier | Premium | Budget |
| Speed | Slow/Reasoning | Medium |
| Hosting | Closed/API | Open/Self-host |
| Modality | Multimodal (vision) | Text |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2026 | Oct 2025 |
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 if…
- It scores higher on SWE-bench Verified (72% vs 63%), the best proxy for real-world coding.
- It's tuned for complex refactors, agentic coding, hard debugging, deep reasoning.
Pick DeepSeek V4 if…
- It's cheaper (Budget tier vs Premium).
- It has a larger context window (256K vs 200K).
- It responds faster (Medium).
- It's tuned for low-cost coding LLM with self-host option; strong English + Chinese coding capabilities.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs DeepSeek V4: which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger coder of the two on benchmarks, but DeepSeek V4 can be the better pick when cost, speed, or context window matter more. See the full spec table for SWE-bench, HumanEval, MMLU, context window, and pricing on both. Benchmarks are a directional signal, not a guarantee for your codebase — the most reliable test is running both on a real task you care about.
Compare these head-to-head with live data, or build a full stack around your pick — Flowpicker shows compatibility and monthly cost.
Open the live comparison →More comparisons
See the full model leaderboard ranked by SWE-bench, HumanEval, and MMLU.