Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking vs Step 3.7 Flash

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 10 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

36.57/100
Margin
14.2pts
winning →
50.76/100
0 category wins0 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking supported; Step 3.7 Flash estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Step 3.7 Flash share 10 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking; 20 to Step 3.7 Flash.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
10
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking only
0
Step 3.7 Flash only
20
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Step 3.7 Flash is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 10 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Step 3.7 Flash has the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Step 3.7 Flash
CategoryClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingΔStep 3.7 Flash
AgenticClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapStep 3.7 Flash66.4
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapStep 3.7 Flash56.3

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingStep 3.7 FlashComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot availableStep 3.7 Flash$0.2 input / $1.15 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking29 tok/sStep 3.7 FlashNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking15.00 sStep 3.7 FlashNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4.1 Opus Thinking200KStep 3.7 Flash256KStep 3.7 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingStep 3.7 FlashResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 71.4%98.5%Step 3.7 Flash leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.5%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 75.8%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 92.8%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 25.9%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 49.5%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 67.1%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 47.2%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 51.57%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.5%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1017Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 14.8%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingStep 3.7 FlashResult
Terminal-Bench HardSource 34.3%35.6%Step 3.7 Flash leads
AA-SciCodeSource 40.9%40.0%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
SWE-bench ProSource 56.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.5%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 39.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingStep 3.7 FlashResult
AA-LCRSource 66.3%63.7%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
CritPtSource 0.0%2.3%Step 3.7 Flash leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingStep 3.7 FlashResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 33.7%30.3%Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 80.9%80.9%Tie
AA-HLESource 11.9%19.9%Step 3.7 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -37.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 25.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 84.4%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingStep 3.7 FlashResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 67.9%75.3%Step 3.7 Flash leads
SimpleVQASource 79.2%Not comparable
V*Source 95.3%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1218Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 Opus ThinkingStep 3.7 FlashResult
AA-IFBenchSource 55.4%67.3%Step 3.7 Flash leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Step 3.7 Flash on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Step 3.7 Flash today?

Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking: Pricing unavailable Step 3.7 Flash: $0.20 input / $1.15 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 16, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.