Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
Head-to-head evidence from 23 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #34 (Supported); Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) #27 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 and Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) share 23 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 36 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5; 15 to Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive).
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 23
- Claude Opus 4.5 only
- 36
- Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) only
- 15
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 23 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 66.27 versus 64.22. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)'s sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 75.1 against 62.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 30.8% to 54.7%. Claude Opus 4.5 does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
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 | Claude Opus 4.5 | Δ | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.562.6 | Margin→ 12.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.1 |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.564.4 | Margin→ 11.4 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.8 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.571.7 | Margin→ 6.9 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)78.6 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.569.9 | Margin← 4.8 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)65.1 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.558.1 | Margin→ 1.9 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)60.0 |
| Math | Claude Opus 4.557.5 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not measured |
| Multilingual | Claude Opus 4.585.7 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.569.5 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 30.8%B 54.7%Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 23.9HLE: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 30.8%; Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 54.7%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 68.5%B 91%Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 22.5CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 68.5%; Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 91%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 66.3%B 78%Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 11.7OSWorld-Verified: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 66.3%; Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 78%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 59.3%B 69.4%Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 10.1Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 59.3%; Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 69.4%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 87%B 94.2%Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 7.2GPQA: Claude Opus 4.5 scored 87%; Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 94.2%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5$5 input / $25 output | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)$5 input / $25 output | Listed prices are equal. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.546 tok/s | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.51.01 s | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5200K | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)1M | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.3% | 69.4% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 66.3% | 78% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| OSWorldSource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.6% | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 23.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | 26.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 42.3% | 77.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| MCP-TasksSource | 71.8% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 76.4% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 50.6% | 73.1% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | 88.6% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.23% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 32.3% | 45.9% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 79.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 44.4% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 49.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1495 | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 18.2% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 46.7% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.9% | 87.6% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 84.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.1% | 64.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 77.5% | — | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 47.0% | 54.5% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 69.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 73.6% | Not comparable |
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LongBench v2Source | 64.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AI-NeedleSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-LCRSource | 65.3% | 70.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| CritPtSource | 0.3% | 12.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| MRCR v2 128K-256KSource | — | 59.2% | Not comparable |
| ARC-AGI-2Source | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87% | 94.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| SuperGPQASource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | 96.6% | — | Not comparable |
| C-EvalSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 30.8% | 54.7% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 34.7% | 53.5% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 81.0% | 91.4% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 12.9% | 39.6% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -3.9% | 26.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.7% | 45.8% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.4% | 36.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 88.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 94.2% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 46.9% | Not comparable |
Math8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 95.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 93.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 84.0% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 20.690% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.167% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath (legacy)Source | — | 43.8% | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.5 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | 74.3% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 68.5% | 91% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| VideoMMMUSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 45.7% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 67.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 71.2% | 78.8% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1277 | 1325 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 43.6% | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 66.27 to 64.22. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 30.8% and 54.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60 versus 58.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 78.6 versus 71.7. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for reasoning, Claude Opus 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 75.8 versus 64.4. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.1 versus 62.6. Inside this category, MCP Atlas is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.5 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.9 versus 65.1. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.