Model Comparison
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort)
vs. Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
Comparing 2 AI models · 0 benchmarks · DeepSeek, Anthropic
Recommended Pick
DeV4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort)6 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort)
100.0 value score
53.2 reasoning / $1.98/1M
Lowest Price
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort)
$1.32/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
62.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
77.0 coding index
Differences That Matter
Best value
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort) is 3.8x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort).
Speed gap
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort) generates about 1.2x as many tokens per second as Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) leads V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort) by 9.3 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) leads V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort) by 8.2 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick De V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort) | An Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $1.32/1M | $5.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $3.96/1M | $25.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.98/1M | $10.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | Anthropic |
| Release Date | Aug 13, 2026 | Jul 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 66.3 tok/s | 53.6 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1590ms | 20040ms |
| Latency | 31740ms | 20040ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 23.3 |
| Reasoning Score | 53.2 | 62.5 |
| Intelligence | 53.2 | 62.5 |
| Coding | 68.8 | 77.0 |
Key Takeaways
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort) offers the best value at $1.32/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 62.5 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort) reaches a 77.0 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
V4 Pro 0813 (Reasoning, Max Effort)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
