Compare Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Anthropic) and DeepSeek V4 Flash (DeepSeek) by price, context, capabilities, and latency.
Side by side
Compare price, provider, context, capabilities, latency, and source basis.
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Capabilities | Best for | Latency | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5 | Anthropic | $3 / 1M tokens | $15 / 1M tokens | 1M | Tool callingJSON modeLong contextReasoning | coding agents, code review | 1600-4800ms | Catalog | OpenRouter if available |
| DeepSeek V4 Flashdeepseek-v4-flash | DeepSeek | $0.112 / 1M tokens | $0.224 / 1M tokens | 128k | Tool callingJSON modeLong contextReasoning | low-cost Chinese tasks, long-context summary | 700-2200ms | Catalog | OpenRouter if available |
FAQ
DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper ($0.112 / 1M tokens input / $0.224 / 1M tokens output) vs Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 ($3 / 1M tokens input / $15 / 1M tokens output). Actual cost depends on your input/output token mix — estimate it with the pricing calculator.
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 is larger (1M tokens) vs 128k tokens.
Both target Coding. Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash to optimize cost, or Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5 for the longer context window. Test both on real prompts before committing production traffic.