Model Comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
vs. V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Anthropic, DeepSeek
Recommended Pick
De V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort)
57.9 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort)
43.2 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort).
Reasoning gap
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort) leads Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) by 3.9 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort) leads Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) by 15.6 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort) wins 11 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) | Top Pick De V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.43/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.87/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.54/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Release Date | Feb 24, 2025 | Apr 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 56.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1174ms |
| Latency | — | 36641ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 54.0 | 57.9 |
| Intelligence | 34.7 | 49.8 |
| Coding | 27.6 | 43.2 |
| Math | 56.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 77.2% | 90.5% |
| MMLU Pro | 83.7% | — |
| HLE | 10.3% | 33.5% |
| LiveCodeBench | 47.3% | — |
| MATH 500 | 94.7% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 56.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 48.7% | — |
| SciCode | 40.3% | 46.4% |
| LCR | 60.7% | 65.0% |
| IFBench | 48.3% | 71.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 54.7% | 94.2% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 21.2% | 41.7% |
Key Takeaways
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 57.9 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort) reaches a 43.2 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
V4 Pro (Reasoning, High Effort)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
