Model vs model
Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro are both in llmwise. What each gets on every plan, what it reads, how it's served and what happens when its provider fails, from the catalog and the code that runs them.
Model prices and specs checked against OpenRouter's Claude Opus 5.5 page, OpenRouter's DeepSeek V4 Pro page. Updated .
Short answer
DeepSeek V4 Pro gets four times as many messages: up to 250 messages a month on Pro, against up to 62 messages a month for Claude Opus 5.5. Otherwise, only Claude Opus 5.5 reads images, only Claude Opus 5.5 reads a PDF as the whole file, and only Claude Opus 5.5 can be passed to another model by its maker's safety system. In our test runs, Claude Opus 5.5 passed 49 of the 50 prompts both answered and DeepSeek V4 Pro 49; 2 prompts split them, most on writing (4 to 5).
Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro, prompt by prompt
Every prompt Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro both answered, compared directly, their biggest differences first. One run each, through OpenRouter: a wait depends on the provider and the load that day, so a lead under 10% counts as close.
Of the 50 prompts both answered, both passed 48, only Claude Opus 5.5 passed 1, only DeepSeek V4 Pro passed 1, and neither passed 0. Claude Opus 5.5 answered sooner on 13 of the 50 and DeepSeek V4 Pro on 32; the rest were within 10% of each other. The 50 replies cost $0.5360 on Claude Opus 5.5 and $0.1827 on DeepSeek V4 Pro: 2.9× less on DeepSeek V4 Pro.
The 2 prompts only one of Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro passed
Argue both sides of free buses (writing): DeepSeek V4 Pro passed and Claude Opus 5.5 didn't. Claude Opus 5.5: Graded 4.7 of 5 on average (lowest 4); but a paragraph of 93 words, over the 90 allowed. DeepSeek V4 Pro: Graded 4.7 of 5 on average (lowest 4).
A frustrated customer (customer support): Claude Opus 5.5 passed and DeepSeek V4 Pro didn't. Claude Opus 5.5: Graded 4.0 of 5 on average (lowest 3). DeepSeek V4 Pro: Graded 2.3 of 5 on average (lowest 1).
Job by job, the widest gaps first
Writing: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 4 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 2.1× sooner at the median, 8.2 s against 3.9 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 17.2× less, $0.0923 against $0.0054 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 106% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
Customer support: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 4 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 1.5× sooner at the median, 6.4 s against 4.1 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 7.0× less, $0.0540 against $0.0077 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 105% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
RAG and answering from documents: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 1.4× sooner at the median, 2.9 s against 2.1 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 12.1× less, $0.0367 against $0.0030 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 210% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
Summarization: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 1.8× sooner at the median, 3.7 s against 2.1 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 10.4× less, $0.0475 against $0.0046 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 95% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
Agents and tool use: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 1.9× sooner at the median, 3.1 s against 1.6 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 7.7× less, $0.0252 against $0.0033 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 34% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
Math: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 1.4× sooner at the median, 3.9 s against 2.7 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 6.8× less, $0.0298 against $0.0044 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 77% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
Translation: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 1.3× sooner at the median, 5.5 s against 4.3 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 5.4× less, $0.0540 against $0.0100 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 100% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
Data analysis: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. DeepSeek V4 Pro answered 1.1× sooner at the median, 4.6 s against 4.1 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 4.6× less, $0.0654 against $0.0143 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 72% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
SQL: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. Claude Opus 5.5 answered 1.9× sooner at the median, 4.3 s against 8.0 s. DeepSeek V4 Pro cost 4.5× less, $0.0459 against $0.0101 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 139% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
Coding: Claude Opus 5.5 passed 5 of 5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 5 of 5. Claude Opus 5.5 answered 16.6× sooner at the median, 7.2 s against 119.6 s. Claude Opus 5.5 cost 1.4× less, $0.0853 against $0.1200 for the 5 replies. Claude Opus 5.5's replies ran 60% longer, in tokens of reply, thinking not counted.
All 50 prompts: who passed, who answered sooner, who cost less
| Prompt | Result | Sooner | Cheaper |
|---|---|---|---|
| Turn a title into a URL slug | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.3×took 3.1 s and 3.9 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.7×cost $0.0055 and $0.0015 |
| Parse a duration like “1h 30m” | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 16.6×took 7.2 s and 119.6 s | Claude Opus 5.5, 3.3×cost $0.0112 and $0.0366 |
| Merge overlapping intervals | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.8×took 3.7 s and 6.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.7×cost $0.0077 and $0.0021 |
| Evaluate an arithmetic expression, no eval | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 9.2×took 15.8 s and 145.7 s | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.3×cost $0.0336 and $0.0440 |
| Parse CSV with quoted fields | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 10.3×took 11.9 s and 122.3 s | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.3×cost $0.0273 and $0.0357 |
| Announce a second bakery shop on LinkedIn | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.2×took 8.7 s and 3.9 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 18.3×cost $0.0175 and $0.0010 |
| Rewrite corporate jargon in plain words | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.1×took 5.1 s and 5.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.2×cost $0.0078 and $0.0024 |
| Decline a meeting and offer two times | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.2×took 4.1 s and 3.3 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 9.5×cost $0.0056 and $0.0006 |
| A product announcement with five rules | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 4.5×took 8.2 s and 1.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 34.1×cost $0.0170 and $0.0005 |
| Argue both sides of free buses | Only DeepSeek V4 Pro | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 5.5×took 22.5 s and 4.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 50.4×cost $0.0443 and $0.0009 |
| A discount, then sales tax | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.5×took 2.7 s and 1.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 7.3×cost $0.0037 and $0.0005 |
| Pens at 3 for $4 | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.0×took 5.3 s and 2.7 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 8.1×cost $0.0084 and $0.0010 |
| Compound interest over three years | Both passed | Closetook 3.7 s and 3.4 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 5.7×cost $0.0043 and $0.0008 |
| Four-digit numbers whose digits sum to 9 | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.2×took 4.7 s and 4.0 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 6.5×cost $0.0077 and $0.0012 |
| The highest of three dice is a 5 | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.5×took 3.9 s and 2.5 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 6.3×cost $0.0057 and $0.0009 |
| An article in three bullets | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 4.5×took 8.1 s and 1.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 17.1×cost $0.0171 and $0.0010 |
| An email thread in one sentence | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.1×took 2.6 s and 1.2 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 8.6×cost $0.0044 and $0.0005 |
| Decisions and action items from a meeting | Both passed | Closetook 5.8 s and 5.4 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 10.8×cost $0.0118 and $0.0011 |
| A quarterly memo for the CEO | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.5×took 3.5 s and 2.3 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 5.4×cost $0.0075 and $0.0014 |
| A study with a negative result | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.8×took 3.7 s and 2.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 12.2×cost $0.0066 and $0.0005 |
| The region with the most revenue | Both passed | Closetook 4.1 s and 4.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 4.4×cost $0.0087 and $0.0020 |
| Average order value in August | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.1×took 4.4 s and 2.2 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 9.0×cost $0.0107 and $0.0012 |
| Revenue change from July to August | Both passed | Closetook 5.1 s and 5.2 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 6.0×cost $0.0120 and $0.0020 |
| A median, filtered two ways | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.9×took 4.6 s and 1.2 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 7.5×cost $0.0079 and $0.0011 |
| Correlation between ad spend and sign-ups | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.4×took 11.5 s and 8.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.2×cost $0.0261 and $0.0081 |
| A late order | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.9×took 7.8 s and 4.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 5.0×cost $0.0114 and $0.0023 |
| A return inside the window | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.3×took 4.4 s and 1.3 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 11.0×cost $0.0074 and $0.0007 |
| A frustrated customer | Only Claude Opus 5.5 | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.5×took 6.4 s and 9.5 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 6.2×cost $0.0111 and $0.0018 |
| A refund request outside the window | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.4×took 6.1 s and 2.5 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 8.7×cost $0.0106 and $0.0012 |
| A message with a planted instruction | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.2×took 7.9 s and 6.7 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 7.9×cost $0.0136 and $0.0017 |
| A delivery message into Spanish | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 2.7×took 3.2 s and 8.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.5×cost $0.0064 and $0.0044 |
| A product description into French | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 4.3×took 5.8 s and 1.3 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 17.9×cost $0.0113 and $0.0006 |
| A meeting note into German | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.3×took 5.5 s and 4.3 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 6.6×cost $0.0096 and $0.0015 |
| Idioms into natural Japanese | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.3×took 3.6 s and 2.7 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 5.6×cost $0.0062 and $0.0011 |
| A lease clause into Brazilian Portuguese | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.4×took 11.4 s and 16.4 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 8.5×cost $0.0204 and $0.0024 |
| Customers in one country | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.2×took 2.5 s and 1.2 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 12.2×cost $0.0048 and $0.0004 |
| Count orders by status | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.3×took 2.5 s and 1.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 12.0×cost $0.0049 and $0.0004 |
| Revenue by category | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 1.9×took 4.3 s and 8.0 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.6×cost $0.0092 and $0.0025 |
| Every customer, even those without orders | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 2.1×took 5.0 s and 10.4 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.9×cost $0.0094 and $0.0032 |
| Monthly revenue with a running total | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 2.1×took 7.8 s and 16.6 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 4.9×cost $0.0176 and $0.0036 |
| A fact from one section | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.3×took 2.5 s and 1.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 11.0×cost $0.0054 and $0.0005 |
| Core hours and start times | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.2×took 2.6 s and 0.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 15.1×cost $0.0054 and $0.0004 |
| Two sections in one answer | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.4×took 2.9 s and 2.1 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 7.0×cost $0.0053 and $0.0008 |
| A later amendment changes the answer | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.1×took 7.7 s and 2.5 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 16.8×cost $0.0148 and $0.0009 |
| A question the handbook doesn't answer | Both passed | Claude Opus 5.5, 2.6×took 3.4 s and 8.8 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 11.0×cost $0.0057 and $0.0005 |
| Pick the tool and work out the date | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 1.6×took 2.7 s and 1.6 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 8.0×cost $0.0041 and $0.0005 |
| Convert a currency | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.1×took 2.8 s and 0.9 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 10.0×cost $0.0041 and $0.0004 |
| Book a meeting from a sentence | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 3.1×took 7.2 s and 2.3 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 7.0×cost $0.0059 and $0.0008 |
| Search, but don't book | Both passed | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 2.2×took 3.1 s and 1.4 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 6.9×cost $0.0046 and $0.0007 |
| Two calls with a unit conversion | Both passed | Closetook 3.4 s and 3.7 s | DeepSeek V4 Pro, 7.7×cost $0.0064 and $0.0008 |
Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro in our test runs
Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro on the same prompts, job by job: how many replies passed their check.
Based on 100 of our test runs on , through OpenRouter with the app's own prompt and settings. Updated .
| Job | Claude Opus 5.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Coding | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| Writing | 4 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| Math | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| Summarization | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| Data analysis | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| Customer support | 5 of 5 | 4 of 5 |
| Translation | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| SQL | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| RAG and answering from documents | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| Agents and tool use | 5 of 5 | 5 of 5 |
| All jobs | 49 of 50 · 1 message each · $0.0107 a reply | 49 of 50 · 1 message each · $0.0037 a reply |
The same prompts, sent to both through llmwise's own pipeline and checked the same way: five for each job. A bold count is the one that passed more. Messages: what each reply counted as on Pro. Cost: what OpenRouter charged us per reply, on average. Every prompt, and how it's scored.
Where they differed most, writing: both replies to a prompt only one of them passed.
A hard prompt: “Argue both sides of free buses”, in full.
Claude Opus 5.5
Failed: Graded 4.7 of 5 on average (lowest 4); but a paragraph of 93 words, over the 90 allowed.
Free buses turn public transit into what it should be: a public good, like sidewalks or streetlights. Fare collection often recovers only a small share of operating costs, yet it slows boarding, requires costly equipment, and deters the riders who need buses most. Remove fares and ridership climbs, as Kansas City and Tallinn saw, easing congestion and cutting emissions. Low-income workers gain hundreds of dollars a year, drivers stop policing payments, and buses move faster. A city that funds roads without tolls can surely fund buses without fares. Free is not the same as good. Fares fund service, and losing them forces a choice between tax hikes and cuts to frequency, reliability, and coverage, which are the things riders say they want. Studies of fare-free systems find many new riders were pedestrians and cyclists, not drivers, so congestion and emissions barely budge. Some cities report more disruptive incidents, driving away commuters. Low-income riders are better served by targeted discounts, while the revenue preserved buys more buses, more routes, and shorter waits. A bus that never comes is worthless at any price.
520 tokens in, 2,109 out (1,746 of them reasoning) · 22.5 s · $0.0443 · 1 message on Pro · answered by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 via Claude Platform on AWS ·
DeepSeek V4 Pro
Passed: Graded 4.7 of 5 on average (lowest 4).
Making buses free turns public transit into a true public good, like sidewalks or libraries. It removes fares as a barrier for low-income riders, boosts ridership, cuts traffic congestion and emissions, and speeds boarding by eliminating payment delays. Cities already subsidize most transit costs; dropping the small fare share is a modest investment with outsized returns in mobility, equity, and cleaner air. The strongest case against free buses is that fares, however small, are the only direct signal of demand. Removing them invites overcrowding on popular routes while doing nothing to expand service where it is sparse. Scarce transit dollars are better spent on frequency, reliability, and coverage—improvements that actually attract riders—than on subsidizing trips for people who can already afford to pay.
395 tokens in, 193 out (40 of them reasoning) · 4.1 s · $0.0009 · 1 message on Pro · answered by deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-0813 via Wafer ·
Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro on every plan
Whether the one-time free trial reaches each model, then each paid plan's messages on it.
| Plan | Price | Claude Opus 5.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | Not in the trial | Not in the trial |
| Plus | $10 a month | Up to 31 a month | Up to 125 a month |
| Pro | $20 a month | Up to 62 a month | Up to 250 a month |
| Max | $50 a month | Up to 200 a month | Up to 800 a month |
| Ultra | $100 a month | Up to 450 a month | Up to 1,800 a month |
| Studio | $200 a month | Up to 1,000 a month | Up to 4,000 a month |
Prices don't include tax, which is added where it applies and shown before you pay. A paid plan's month is one allowance shared by every model, so each monthly count is the most you get if all of it goes to that model. It renews each billing period; everyday models refill daily at 00:00 UTC. Long chats count more per reply. How pricing works.
Every limit is published. Paid plans also have a monthly fair-use limit on AI cost: Plus $3.75, Pro $7.50, Max $20, Ultra $42, Studio $85. Using every message on your plan at typical sizes stays under it; very large messages and heavy research use it faster. Every limit, explained.
What differs
Messages on Pro
DeepSeek V4 Pro gets four times as many messages: up to 250 messages a month on Pro, against up to 62 messages a month for Claude Opus 5.5.
Context window
Claude Opus 5.5 takes up to 1M tokens; DeepSeek V4 Pro up to 1.05M tokens. A chat in llmwise holds up to 200k tokens, which fits in either, so the difference shows only through each maker's own API.
Images and PDFs
DeepSeek V4 Pro doesn't read images. DeepSeek V4 Pro gets a PDF's text rather than the file itself.
On Free
Neither is in the free trial: both need a paid plan, from Plus.
Where messages go
Claude Opus 5.5: Sent to Anthropic directly. DeepSeek V4 Pro: Served through OpenRouter, only by hosts that don't store or train on prompts. The maker's own endpoint is never asked.
Fact by fact
| Fact | Claude Opus 5.5 | DeepSeek V4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Context window | 1M tokens | 1.05M tokens |
| Reads images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | Whole file | Text only |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| API price (October 2026) | $4.00 in / $20.00 out per million tokens | $0.40 in / $4.00 out per million tokens |
| A typical message at API prices (4,000 tokens in, 700 out) | $0.0300 | $0.0044 |
| A $10 top-up adds | 50 messages | 200 messages |
| Where a message goes | Sent to Anthropic directly. | Served through OpenRouter, only by hosts that don't store or train on prompts. The maker's own endpoint is never asked. |
| If the provider fails | If Anthropic fails before the reply starts (an overload, a server error, a dropped connection), llmwise sends the same request to Claude Opus 5.5 through OpenRouter instead. | When one host is down, OpenRouter moves the request to another host that meets the same rules. |
| Anthropic's safety fallback | Anthropic's safety system can pass a Claude Opus 5.5 message to another Claude model. The reply then names the model that answered and says what you were charged for. | Doesn't apply |
Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
From the facts above and our test runs: the rest is how their answers suit your work, which one chat can show you.
Pick Claude Opus 5.5: it reads images; it reads a PDF as the whole file, charts and scans included.
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro: more messages for the money, up to 250 messages a month on Pro.
Each model's page, the families, and other pairs
Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro is one pair of models. The page below covers the whole families.
- Claude Opus 5.5: price, limits and messages on every plan
- DeepSeek V4 Pro: price, limits and messages on every plan
- DeepSeek vs Claude
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Kimi K3
- DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.3
- Claude Sonnet 5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- Every model-vs-model page
Claude Opus 5.5 is a Claude model; DeepSeek V4 Pro is a DeepSeek model.
Questions
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro cheaper in llmwise?
DeepSeek V4 Pro gets four times as many messages: up to 250 messages a month on Pro, against up to 62 messages a month for Claude Opus 5.5. Every paid plan's monthly allowance is shared by the models on it, so each count is the most you get if it all goes to that model.
Can I try Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro for free?
Neither is in the free trial of 5 messages: both need a paid plan, from Plus.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 1.05M tokens, against 1M tokens. A chat in llmwise holds up to 200k tokens, which fits in either, so the difference shows only through each maker's own API.
Can I use Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro in the same chat?
Yes. Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for one message and DeepSeek V4 Pro for the next; the second sees the whole chat, including the first one's answer.
Which did better in your test runs, Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
On the same 50 prompts, run on October 8, 2026, Claude Opus 5.5 passed 49 and DeepSeek V4 Pro passed 49. The table on this page has each job, and every reply is published.
Claude, GPT, Gemini, DeepSeek, Grok, Kimi, GLM, and Mistral, in one chat.
See what a message costs before you send it. Free is 5 messages to try; sign in with an email link, no password or card.