Claude Sonnet vs DeepSeek: cost & margin
Claude Sonnet (Anthropic) and DeepSeek (DeepSeek) sit at different price points. At a typical 500k/150k token mix per customer, DeepSeek is cheaper ($0.33 vs $3.75 per customer), and DeepSeek has the lower output-token price — the part that usually drives an AI SaaS bill.
| Claude Sonnet | DeepSeek | |
|---|---|---|
| Input $/Mtok | $3 | $0.3 |
| Output $/Mtok | $15 | $1.2 |
| Cost / customer (typical) | $3.75 | $0.33 |
| Margin at $49/mo | 92.3% | 99.3% |
Cost per customer as usage grows
Monthly LLM cost per customer at four usage levels — the gap widens the more your customers use.
| Usage / mo | Claude Sonnet | DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|
| Light | $0.75 | $0.07 |
| Typical | $3.75 | $0.33 |
| Heavy | $15.00 | $1.32 |
| Power user | $61.50 | $5.40 |
Which should you pick?
Claude Sonnet
Worth it when its quality justifies the higher token cost — price your plans to cover the difference.
DeepSeek
Best when cost is the priority: cheaper on both input and output, so it keeps more customers profitable at any plan price.
Verdict: at a typical token mix, DeepSeek is the cheaper choice per customer. Heavier or output-heavy workloads can change the picture — check yours below.
FAQ
- Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet or DeepSeek?
- At a typical 500k / 150k token mix, DeepSeek is cheaper — $0.33 vs $3.75 per customer per month, a $3.42 gap that widens as usage grows.
- Does Claude Sonnet ever make more sense than DeepSeek?
- Yes — token price isn't everything. If Claude Sonnet needs fewer retries or shorter outputs to finish the job, or its quality lifts conversion, it can be the better margin call despite the higher per-token price. Model it on your own usage.
Per-model details
Other comparisons