▸ compare
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash
Side-by-side benchmark comparison based on independent public data. Scores, pricing, context, and task breakdown.
▸ verdict
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5
85.2
higher score
vs
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash
80.9
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads with a higher composite benchmark score. It's the stronger choice for general-purpose tasks based on public benchmark data.
▸ score breakdown
| Task | Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 | DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 85.2 | 80.9 | +4.3 |
| Coding | 59.2 | — | — |
| Reasoning | 43.3 | — | — |
| Math | — | — | — |
| Writing | 83.8 | — | — |
| JSON | 28.6 | — | — |
▸ specs & pricing
| Attribute | Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 | DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Deepseek |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/M tokens | $3.00/M | $0.09/M |
| Output $/M tokens | $15.00/M | $0.18/M |
| Weights | proprietary | proprietary |
▸ frequently asked
Is Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash?
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher overall (85.2 vs 80.9) in the benchmark composite. The best choice depends on the specific use case and budget.
Which is cheaper: Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash?
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper at $0.09/M input tokens vs $3/M for Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Which model is better for coding?
Both models perform similarly on coding benchmarks (SWE-Bench, Aider Polyglot, LiveCodeBench).