Cost and performance comparison
Claude 3 Opus vs DeepSeek R1
Model AAnthropic
Claude 3 Opus
- Cost / 1M Tokens
- $33.00
- 70% in · 30% out mix
- ≈ $36.30 for the same text, tokenizer included
- Value Index (score÷cost)
- 2.5
- Higher = better value
- Speed
- 50/100
- Context
- 200K
- Tier
- Power Tier
Last list price before the model was retired.
Its tokenizer produces about 10% more tokens than OpenAI's for the same text, so the real cost runs higher than the list price suggests. This is an estimate: the tokenizer has not been measured yet.
Model BDeepSeek
DeepSeek R1
- Cost / 1M Tokens
- $1.04
- 70% in · 30% out mix
- Value Index (score÷cost)
- 87.5
- Higher = better value
- Speed
- 60/100
- Context
- 128K
- Tier
- Power Tier
Last list price before the model was retired.
Across the 25 languages we measured, it needs about 21% more tokens than OpenAI's for the same text. Costs by language
In-depth analysis
Claude 3 Opus vs DeepSeek R1: Detailed Comparison
Claude 3 Opus is Anthropic's flagship-tier language model with a 200K-token context window, excelling at reasoning. DeepSeek R1 from DeepSeek is a flagship-tier model supporting 128K tokens in context, with standout performance in reasoning.
DeepSeek R1 is both the cheaper and the stronger model here — for the same text it costs 97% less than Claude 3 Opus and still leads on combined coding and reasoning by 11 points. There is no tradeoff to weigh on this pair: unless you need something specific from Claude 3 Opus, the cheaper model is simply the better one. Claude 3 Opus is priced at $15.00/M input tokens and $75.00/M output tokens. DeepSeek R1 costs $0.55/M input and $2.19/M output.
Claude 3 Opus turns the same text into about 8% more tokens than DeepSeek R1, because their tokenizers differ — so comparing list prices per token understates what Claude 3 Opus costs. For the same text, split 70% input and 30% output and counted the way OpenAI's tokenizer counts it, Claude 3 Opus works out at about $36.30 per million tokens and DeepSeek R1 at $1.06. Every cost figure on this page includes that difference.
On iOPTERA's editorial scores, DeepSeek R1 leads with 88/100 for coding and 93/100 for reasoning, against Claude 3 Opus's 80/100 and 90/100.
Capability breakdown
Across the five core benchmark categories, here is how Claude 3 Opus and DeepSeek R1 stack up head to head:
Best model by task
- coding: DeepSeek R1 wins with 88/100
- reasoning: DeepSeek R1 wins with 93/100
- data extraction: Claude 3 Opus wins with 85/100
- creative tasks: Claude 3 Opus wins with 89/100
- vision/multimodal: Claude 3 Opus wins with 87/100
Estimated monthly cost at scale
For 10M + 2M tokens of text a month (counted the way OpenAI's tokenizer counts), Claude 3 Opus runs about $330.00 while DeepSeek R1 runs about $10.08 — DeepSeek R1 saves roughly $319.92 (97%) every month.
What actually decides it
Claude 3 Opus and DeepSeek R1 come from different labs, which means different tokenizers, different API shapes, and a second vendor relationship. The same English text does not produce the same token count on both, so a price-per-million comparison understates the difference — measure your own prompts on each before treating the headline rates as the full story.
DeepSeek R1 and Claude 3 Opus were released within 10 months of each other, so they are competing on the same evaluations under roughly the same conditions. That makes a direct benchmark comparison meaningful here in a way it usually is not — neither model has the advantage of being measured on a newer, easier set of tests.
Claude 3 Opus carries the larger context window at 200K tokens versus 128K for DeepSeek R1. The gap is real but not decisive — it matters if your prompts routinely run long, and is irrelevant if they sit where most production prompts sit, well under 100K. Bear in mind that filling a large window is also what makes a request expensive.
Throughput is close enough to ignore — 60/100 versus 50/100. Neither model will feel noticeably quicker in an interactive product, so latency is not a reason to choose between them.
DeepSeek R1 wins this comparison outright — cheaper and stronger. Choose Claude 3 Opus only if it has a specific capability you need; on price and benchmarks it is behind on both.
Capability scores
iOPTERA editorial scores across 5 categories — informed by public benchmarks, not measured by us
Coding
Reasoning
Extraction
Creative
Vision
Speed Score
Context Window
What Is a Token?
Models don't read words — they process tokens.
A token is roughly 4 characters of English text (~¾ of a word). Your API bill is priced per million tokens — understanding this directly reduces your costs.
Short phrase
"Hello, world!"
- Claude 3 Opus
- $6.60
- DeepSeek R1
- $0.22
Business email
One typical email (~200 words)
- Claude 3 Opus
- $445.50
- DeepSeek R1
- $15.15
Code file
50-line Python script
- Claude 3 Opus
- $660.00
- DeepSeek R1
- $22.44
Prices shown are for 100,000 runs of each workload — one run costs a fraction of a cent on both Claude 3 Opus and DeepSeek R1, so the number only becomes meaningful at production volume. Input tokens only; add your output volume in the calculator below.
How to check your token usage
response.usage.total_tokensEvery API response includes a usage object. Sum total_tokens across all calls to get your monthly figure, then use the calculator below.
Your Cost Calculator
Enter your actual monthly token usage to see real savings
Quick Presets
Claude 3 Opus
$1,089.00/mo
$13,068.00/yr
DeepSeek R1
$31.89/mo
$382.62/yr
Annual Savings
$12,685.38 saved per year
DeepSeek R1 cheaper · $1,057.11/mo
Related Comparisons
Explore similar model pairs to find your best fit
Claude 3vsClaude Opus
$15.00 · $4.00/M input
Claude 3vsClaude Fable
$15.00 · $10.00/M input
Claude 3vsClaude Opus
$15.00 · $5.00/M input
Claude 3vsGPT-5.6 Sol
$15.00 · $4.00/M input
Claude 3vsClaude Opus
$15.00 · $5.00/M input
Claude 3vsClaude Opus
$15.00 · $5.00/M input
DeepSeek R1vsDeepSeek V4
$0.55 · $1.32/M input
DeepSeek R1vsClaude Fable
$0.55 · $10.00/M input