UseRightAI
HomeModelsAsk AIComparePricingWhat's New
UseRightAICut through AI hype. Pick what works.

Independent AI model tracker. Live pricing, real benchmarks, zero vendor bias.

X (Twitter)LinkedInUpdatesContact

Compare

Opus 4.8 vs Opus 4.7Fable 5 vs Opus 4.8New AI Models 2026ChatGPT vs ClaudeGPT-4o vs Claude SonnetClaude vs GeminiDeepSeek vs ChatGPTMistral vs ClaudeGemini Flash vs GPT-4o MiniLlama vs ChatGPTAll comparisons →Build your own →

Best For

CodingWritingDevelopersProduct ManagersDesignersSalesBest Cheap AIBest Free AI

Pricing & Data

API Token PricingPrice HistoryBenchmark ScoresPrivacy & SafetySubscription PlansCost CalculatorWhich AI is Cheapest?

Company

About UseRightAIContactWhat ChangedAll ModelsDisclosuresPrivacy PolicyTerms of Service

© 2026 UseRightAI. Independent · Free forever · Not affiliated with any AI provider.

Affiliate links are clearly labeled. See disclosures.

HomeComparisonsDeepSeek R1 vs Claude Opus 4.7

Head-to-head · Updated May 2026

Data verified August 2026

DeepSeek R1 vs Claude Opus 4.7

DeepSeek R1 and Claude Opus 4.7 sit at opposite ends of the price spectrum but both target high-reasoning, high-complexity tasks. DeepSeek R1 costs $0.55/1M input — 9× cheaper than Opus 4.7's $5/1M — and was built specifically for chain-of-thought reasoning. Claude Opus 4.7 leads on coding (SWE-Bench Pro 64.3%), has a 1M token context window, and is a more capable all-rounder. For pure structured reasoning at budget cost, DeepSeek R1 is exceptional. For frontier coding, complex multi-task workflows, and maximum quality, Claude Opus 4.7 is worth the premium.

DeepSeekBudget

DeepSeek R1

Open-source o1-class reasoning at a fraction of the cost.

VS
AnthropicPremium

Claude Opus 4.7

Previous Opus flagship, now superseded by Claude Opus 4.8 at the same price.

Winner

At a glance

DeepSeek R1Claude Opus 4.7
Input cost / 1M tokens$$0.55/1M$$5.00/1M
Output cost / 1M tokens$$2.19/1M$$25.00/1M
Context window128k tokens1M tokens
SpeedDeliberateDeliberate
Price tierBudgetPremium
Benchmarks
SWE-bench (coding)49.2%80%
Arena Elo1,3201,800
MMLU90.8%92%

How they compare

Which model wins for each use case — and why.

ReasoningDeepSeek R1 wins

DeepSeek R1 was purpose-built for chain-of-thought reasoning and matches o1-level performance on math and logic benchmarks at 9× lower cost.

CodingClaude Opus 4.7 wins

Claude Opus 4.7 leads SWE-Bench Pro at 64.3%. DeepSeek R1 is strong at algorithmic problems but Claude is significantly better at real-world software engineering.

PriceDeepSeek R1 wins

DeepSeek R1 at $0.55/1M input is 9× cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7 at $5/1M. For high-volume reasoning tasks, the savings are transformative.

SpeedClaude Opus 4.7 wins

DeepSeek R1 is a deliberate thinking model — slow by design. Claude Opus 4.7 is faster for production workflows where latency matters.

VersatilityClaude Opus 4.7 wins

Claude Opus 4.7 handles coding, writing, vision, and research equally well. DeepSeek R1 is optimised for reasoning and can be inconsistent on diverse open-ended tasks.

Which should you pick?

Pick DeepSeek R1 if…

  • Your work is primarily mathematical reasoning, logic, or structured problem-solving
  • You want o1-class reasoning quality at budget API pricing
  • Cost per token matters enormously — DeepSeek R1 is 9× cheaper on input
  • Latency is not a constraint and you run reasoning in batch
View DeepSeek R1 details

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 if…

  • You need the best coding performance available — Opus 4.7 leads SWE-Bench Pro
  • Complex multi-task workflows spanning coding, writing, and research
  • Production reliability and consistent output quality across diverse tasks
  • Speed matters — Claude Opus is significantly faster than DeepSeek R1
View Claude Opus 4.7 details

Bottom line

For most workflows, Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger choice.

Superseded by Opus 4.8 (May 27, 2026) which scores 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro vs 64.3% here — at the same price. For existing pinned integrations Opus 4.7 still works well, but new deployments should use Opus 4.8.

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek R1 better than Claude Opus for reasoning?

For pure mathematical and logical reasoning, DeepSeek R1 matches o1-class performance at 9× lower cost. Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger all-rounder with better coding and versatility.

How much cheaper is DeepSeek R1 than Claude Opus 4.7?

DeepSeek R1 costs $0.55/1M input and $2.19/1M output. Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output — making Claude about 9× more expensive on input and 11× more on output.

Which is better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 is significantly better for coding — it leads SWE-Bench Pro at 64.3%. DeepSeek R1 handles algorithmic and math-heavy coding well but isn't built for general software engineering.

Related comparisons

Comparison
DeepSeek vs ClaudeDeepSeek V3 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6 compared on coding, writing, research, price, and context window — with a verdict on when to use each.Read guide
Comparison
DeepSeek R1 vs ChatGPTDeepSeek R1 vs GPT-5.4 compared on reasoning, coding, math, research, price, and context window — with a verdict on the best reasoning model for your budget.Read guide
Guide
Best AI for CodingClaude Opus 4.7 leads coding AI in 2026 with 64.3% on SWE-Bench Pro. Compare it to GPT-5.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and budget picks like DeepSeek V3 for your stack.Read guide
Budget Question
Which AI Is Cheapest?Find the cheapest AI APIs, the best cheap default, and when the lowest price is not the best decision.Read guide

Newsletter

Get model updates before your workflow falls behind

Pricing changes, new model releases, and updated recommendations — delivered when it matters.

No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.