Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Geprüft vom GetInfoUs-ForschungsteamZuletzt geprüft: October 2026Redaktionelle Richtlinien
Teilen
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 von Anthropic und DeepSeek V4 Pro von DeepSeek gehören zu den führenden KI-Modellen. Claude Sonnet 5.5 bietet ein Kontextfenster von 1M Tokens bei API-Preisen von $2.00/$10.00 pro 1M Tokens, während DeepSeek V4 Pro 1M Tokens Kontext zu $1.32/$3.96 pro 1M Tokens bereitstellt. Hier finden Sie den vollständigen Benchmark-, Latenz- und Kostenvergleich.

Direktvergleich (VS)

Beliebige Modelle wechseln & vergleichen

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Frontier-Flaggschiff-Modell

Claude Sonnet 5.5 von Anthropic ist ein KI-Modell für anspruchsvolles Enterprise-Reasoning, Softwareentwicklung und produktive KI-Workflows mit 1M Kontextfenster, 105 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 78/100 und $2/$10 pro 1M T

Intelligence Index78 / 100
Input Token:

$2.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$10.00 / 1M

Context Window:

1M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

82.9%

DeepSeek

DeepSeek V4 Pro

Autonomes Agenten-Modell

DeepSeek V4 Pro von DeepSeek ist ein KI-Modell für autonome Agenten-Workflows, zuverlässiges Tool-Calling und mehrstufige Automatisierung mit 1M Kontextfenster, 80 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 53/100 und $1.32/$3.96 pro 1M

Intelligence Index53 / 100
Input Token:

$1.32 / 1M

Output Token:

$3.96 / 1M

Context Window:

1M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

68.5%

Wichtigste Unterschiede auf einen Blick

  • DeepSeek V4 Pro is 2.1x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster at 105 tok/s vs 80 tok/s.
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (82.9% vs 68.5%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureClaude Sonnet 5.5DeepSeek V4 Pro
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
7853
Provider
AnthropicDeepSeek
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$2.00 / 1M$1.32 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$10.00 / 1M$3.96 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$1.54 / 1M$0.76 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
128K128K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
105 tok/s80 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
82.9%68.5%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
79.4%81.2%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.20 / 1M$0.14 / 1M

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Claude Sonnet 5.5
+14.4% SWE-bench lead
Cost
DeepSeek V4 Pro
2.1x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Claude Sonnet 5.5
+31% faster generation
Context
Tied
1M tokens window

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Claude Sonnet 5.5DeepSeek V4 Pro
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

82.9%vs68.5%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

79.4%vs81.2%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

90.1%vs88.9%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1490ptsvs1438pts
Humanity's Last Exam (Frontier Expert Knowledge)

Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.

N/Avs15.6%
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

58.9%vs46.5%
SciCode (Scientific Computing)

Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.

N/Avs43%
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

N/Avs70.2%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

N/Avs91%
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

N/Avs90%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

105 tok/s vs80 tok/s

Latenz & Antwortzeit

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Claude Sonnet 5.50.55s
DeepSeek V4 Pro0.58s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Claude Sonnet 5.55.31s
DeepSeek V4 Pro6.83s

Interaktiver Token-Kosten-Simulator

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Claude Sonnet 5.5 Monthly API Bill
$12.30 / month
$2/1M in · $10/1M out
DeepSeek V4 Pro Monthly API Bill
$5.75 / month
$1.32/1M in · $3.96/1M out
DeepSeek V4 Pro saves approximately $6.55 / month (53%) under this workload.2.1x Savings

Claude Sonnet 5.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 1M Kontextfenster und bis zu 128K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 82.9% · GPQA Diamond 79.4%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 105 Token/Sekunde bei nur 550 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Effiziente API-Struktur ($2/$10 pro 1M Token) inklusive Prompt-Caching, Tool-Calling und strikter JSON-Ausgabe
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Proprietäres Cloud-Modell ohne Möglichkeit zum lokalen Download der Modellgewichte
  • Bei hohem Anfragevolumen empfiehlt sich der Einsatz von Prompt-Caching und Batch-API zur Kostenoptimierung

DeepSeek V4 Pro · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 1M Kontextfenster und bis zu 128K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 68.5% · GPQA Diamond 81.2%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 80 Token/Sekunde bei nur 580 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Offene Modellgewichte (MoE (Colossal)) für lokales Self-Hosting und Fine-Tuning über vLLM, SGLang oder Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Erfordert dedizierte GPU-Hardware mit ausreichend VRAM für den lokalen Betrieb in voller Präzision
  • Bei extrem komplexen mehrstufigen Forschungsfragen bieten schwere Reasoning-Spezialmodelle noch tiefere Analysen

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricClaude Sonnet 5.5DeepSeek V4 Pro
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$3.29$0.67
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
72K52K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
37K25K

Technische Spezifikationen

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureClaude Sonnet 5.5DeepSeek V4 Pro
Official API Model ID (SDK)claude-sonnet-5-5-20260901deepseek-reasoner
API ProtocolAnthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AIOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2026-092026-08
Knowledge CutoffJune 2026May 2026
ArchitectureAdaptive Frontier Multimodal TransformerNext-Gen Sparse MoE with Agent RL Tuning
ParametersConfidentialMoE (Colossal)
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPMUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Standard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokensFlat rate ($1.32/1M in) across full 1000K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTL$0.2/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTLAutomatic prefix caching at $0.14/1M (no extra cache-write fee)
Computer Use / GUI AgentSupported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxNative Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP ConnectorsSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportCustom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt DistillationFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMCloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 43 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 151 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationAnthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety EvaluatedOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext
Output Modalitiestexttext

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is more intelligent. It scores 78 compared with 53 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster, generating 105 tokens per second compared with 80 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is cheaper at $0.76 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $1.54 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.55s compared with 0.58s.

Fazit

Sowohl Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Optimal für anspruchsvolles Enterprise-Reasoning, Softwareentwicklung und produktive KI-Workflows, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) als auch DeepSeek V4 Pro (Optimal für autonome Agenten-Workflows, zuverlässiges Tool-Calling und mehrstufige Automatisierung, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) überzeugen im Produktionseinsatz: Claude Sonnet 5.5 führt bei komplexem Reasoning und Coding, Claude Sonnet 5.5 liefert den höheren Token-Durchsatz und DeepSeek V4 Pro ist die kosteneffizienteste Wahl für große API-Workloads.

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Welches Modell ist besser für Coding und Reasoning – Claude Sonnet 5.5 oder DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

Im Gesamt-Intelligenzindex und bei Software-Benchmarks liegt Claude Sonnet 5.5 vorn. Prüfen Sie oben die SWE-bench- und GPQA-Werte für Ihren Anwendungsfall.

Wie unterscheiden sich die API-Preise von Claude Sonnet 5.5 und DeepSeek V4 Pro?+

Claude Sonnet 5.5 kostet $2.00 / $10.00 pro 1M Input-/Output-Tokens, DeepSeek V4 Pro liegt bei $1.32 / $3.96. Beim gewichteten Gesamtpreis ist DeepSeek V4 Pro günstiger.

Welches Modell hat das größere Kontextfenster und die höhere Geschwindigkeit?+

Claude Sonnet 5.5 bietet 1M Tokens Kontext gegenüber 1M Tokens bei DeepSeek V4 Pro. Bei der Generierungsgeschwindigkeit liegt Claude Sonnet 5.5 vorn.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

Offizielle Quellen: Offizielle API-Dokumentation von Anthropic und DeepSeek, Systemkarten und unabhängige Benchmark-Auswertungen (2026).