Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) vs Gemini 3 Pro

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3 Pro only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 90 to 81. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)'s sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 75.8 against 31.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is ARC-AGI-2, 75.8% to 31.1%. Gemini 3 Pro 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 also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $12.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemini 3 Pro. That is roughly 2.1x on output cost alone. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 3 Pro 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. Gemini 3 Pro gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive).