Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs DeepSeek R1 0528
Claude Sonnet 4.6 (2026) and DeepSeek R1 0528 (2025) are frontier-tier reasoning models from Anthropic and DeepSeek. Claude Sonnet 4.6 ships a 1m-token context window, while DeepSeek R1 0528 ships a 130k-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads by 2.3 pts. On pricing, DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0.50/1M input tokens versus $3/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
DeepSeek R1 0528 is ~500% cheaper at $0.50/1M; pay for Claude Sonnet 4.6 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | DeepSeek R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | reasoning-heavy apps and provider-routed production |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 1m | 130k |
| Cheapest output | $15/1M tokens | $2.15/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 6 tracked | 6 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | MMLU PRO leader | 5 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 holds a shared-benchmark lead on MMLU PRO, ahead by 2.3 points.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Function calling in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Claude Sonnet 4.6 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- DeepSeek R1 0528 has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $2.15/1M tokens.
- Local decision data tags DeepSeek R1 0528 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Sonnet 4.6
$6,150
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
DeepSeek R1 0528
$938
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $5,213. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on GCP Vertex AI, OpenRouter, and Microsoft Foundry; start route-level A/B tests there.
- DeepSeek R1 0528 is $12.85/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Function calling before moving production traffic.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter, GCP Vertex AI, and Microsoft Foundry; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is $12.85/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 adds Vision, Multimodal, and Function calling in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-02-17 | 2025-05-28 |
| Context window | 1m | 130k |
| Parameters | — | 685B total, 37B active (MoE) |
| Architecture | decoder only | decoder only |
| License | Proprietary | MIT(OSI) |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Commercial use | Commercial use with conditions | Commercial use allowed |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-12 | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | DeepSeek R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $3/1M tokens | $0.50/1M tokens |
| Output price | $15/1M tokens | $2.15/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | DeepSeek R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | No |
| Multimodal | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | No |
| Tool use | Yes | No |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | Yes |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | Yes | No |
| Parallel agents | Yes | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | DeepSeek R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU PRO | 87.3 | 85.0 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 79.6 | 57.6 |
| Google-Proof Q&A | 89.9 | 81.0 |
| AIME 2025 | 94.0 | 87.5 |
| LiveCodeBench | 80.0 | 73.3 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 87.3 and DeepSeek R1 0528 at 85, with Claude Sonnet 4.6 ahead by 2.3 points; SWE-bench Verified has Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 79.6 and DeepSeek R1 0528 at 57.6, with Claude Sonnet 4.6 ahead by 22.0 points; Google-Proof Q&A has Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 89.9 and DeepSeek R1 0528 at 81, with Claude Sonnet 4.6 ahead by 8.9 points. The largest visible gap is 22.0 points on SWE-bench Verified, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Claude Sonnet 4.6, multimodal input: Claude Sonnet 4.6, function calling: Claude Sonnet 4.6, and tool use: Claude Sonnet 4.6. Both models share reasoning mode, structured outputs, and code execution, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
For cost, Claude Sonnet 4.6 lists $3/1M input and $15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while DeepSeek R1 0528 lists $0.50/1M input and $2.15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts DeepSeek R1 0528 lower by about $5.60 per million blended tokens. Availability is 6 providers versus 6, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 when coding workflow support and larger context windows are central to the workload. Choose DeepSeek R1 0528 when coding workflow support and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or DeepSeek R1 0528?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 1m tokens, while DeepSeek R1 0528 supports 130k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or DeepSeek R1 0528?
DeepSeek R1 0528 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3/1M input and $15/1M output tokens. DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0.50/1M input and $2.15/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 or DeepSeek R1 0528 open source?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is listed under Proprietary. DeepSeek R1 0528 is listed under MIT. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or DeepSeek R1 0528?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or DeepSeek R1 0528?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Claude Sonnet 4.6 and DeepSeek R1 0528?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is available on OpenRouter, Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, and Microsoft Foundry. DeepSeek R1 0528 is available on Together AI, Fireworks AI, GCP Vertex AI, Novita AI, and OpenRouter. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-25. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.