Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) vs Gemma 4 26B A4B
Head-to-head evidence from 18 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) #27 (Estimated); Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) and Gemma 4 26B A4B share 18 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive); 2 to Gemma 4 26B A4B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 18
- Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) only
- 20
- Gemma 4 26B A4B only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 26B A4B only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 18 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 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) is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 66.27 to 57.96. 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 knowledge, where it averages 60 against 43.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 54.7% to 17.2%. Gemma 4 26B A4B 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 $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Gemma 4 26B A4B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 26B A4B.
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 4.7 (Adaptive) | Δ | Gemma 4 26B A4B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)60.0 | Margin← 16.6 | Gemma 4 26B A4B43.4 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)65.1 | Margin→ 8.7 | Gemma 4 26B A4B73.8 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.1 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)78.6 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 54.7%B 17.2%Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 37.5HLE: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 54.7%; Gemma 4 26B A4B scored 17.2%. 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 4.7 (Adaptive) | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)$5 input / $25 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 output | Gemma 4 26B A4B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not available | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not available | Gemma 4 26B A4BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)1M | Gemma 4 26B A4B256K | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 69.4% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 79.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 77.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 78% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 73.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 44.4% | 11.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 88.6% | 43.6% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 49.8% | 13.1% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1495 | 761 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 18.2% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 45.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 46.7% | — | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 87.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 64.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 69.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 73.6% | 39.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 54.5% | 40.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 94.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 54.7% | 17.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 46.9% | 8.7% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 53.5% | 25.7% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.4% | 79.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 39.6% | 18.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 26.2% | -48.1% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 45.8% | 18.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 36.2% | 80.9% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 82.6% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (legacy)Source | 43.8% | — | Not comparable |
MultimodalGemma 4 26B A4B wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| OfficeQA ProSource | 43.6% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 91% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | 82.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 78.8% | 69.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1325 | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 73.8% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) | Gemma 4 26B A4B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 58.6% | 72.4% | Gemma 4 26B A4B leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 66.27 to 57.96. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 54.7% and 17.2%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60 versus 43.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Gemma 4 26B A4B?
Gemma 4 26B A4B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.8 versus 65.1. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro 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.