DeepSeek V3.1
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
DeepSeek V3.1 vs Claude Opus 4
Compare DeepSeek V3.1 by DeepSeek against Claude Opus 4 by Anthropic, in 6 community votes, claude opus 4 wins 67% of head-to-head duels, context windows of 164K vs 200K, tested across 35 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.
Which is better, DeepSeek V3.1 or Claude Opus 4?
Claude Opus 4 is the better choice overall, winning 67% of 6 blind community votes on Rival. DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.2/M input tokens vs $15/M for Claude Opus 4. Context windows: 164K vs 200K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.
Key Differences Between DeepSeek V3.1 and Claude Opus 4
DeepSeek V3.1 is made by deepseek while Claude Opus 4 is from anthropic. DeepSeek V3.1 has a 164K token context window compared to Claude Opus 4's 200K. On pricing, DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.2/M input tokens vs $15/M for Claude Opus 4. In community voting, In 6 community votes, Claude Opus 4 wins 67% of head-to-head duels.
In 6 community votes, Claude Opus 4 wins 67% of head-to-head duels. Claude Opus 4 leads in Web Design. Based on blind community voting from the Rival open dataset of 6+ human preference judgments for this pair.
Web Design: Claude Opus 4 wins 67% of votes
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 4Winner
DeepSeek V3.1Runner-up
Pick Claude Opus 4. In 6 blind votes, Claude Opus 4 wins 67% of the time. That's not luck.
Claude Opus 4 particularly excels in Web Design. DeepSeek V3.1 is 94x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Clear winner
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
92%
Claude Opus 4 uses 4.8x more emoji
DeepSeek V3.1
Claude Opus 4
53%Vocabulary64%
14wSentence Length62w
0.42Hedging0.52
4.0Bold4.4
3.6Lists9.1
0.02Emoji0.11
0.40Headings1.87
0.22Transitions0.27
Based on 23 + 16 text responses
vsAsk them anything yourself
279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.
We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.
Free preview13 of 58 slides
FAQ