Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Claude Opus 5
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 #15 (Supported); Claude Opus 5 #1 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Opus 5 share 12 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7; 67 to Claude Opus 5.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Claude Opus 4.7 only
- 9
- Claude Opus 5 only
- 67
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Opus 5 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 5 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.
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 | Δ | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 590.8 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 589.5 |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 590.4 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 564.7 |
| Math | Claude Opus 4.738.6 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 5Not measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Opus 566.9 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.7$5 input / $25 output | Claude Opus 5$5 input / $25 output | Listed prices are equal. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.7Not available | Claude Opus 5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.7Not available | Claude Opus 5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.71M | Claude Opus 5Not available | A complete context comparison is not available. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic27 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 65.59% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 20.7% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 13.9% | 70.6% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| FrontierBench v0.1Source | — | 43.3% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 90.8% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 95.0% | Not comparable |
| DRACOSource | — | 88.6% | Not comparable |
| BrowseComp (10-agent, prerelease)Source | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 85.8% | Not comparable |
| MCP-Atlas claim coverageSource | — | 89.1% | Not comparable |
| LAB all-pass (Anthropic harness)Source | — | 23.58% | Not comparable |
| LAB criterion-pass (Anthropic harness)Source | — | 93.74% | Not comparable |
| LAB all-pass (Harvey held-out)Source | — | 11.7% | Not comparable |
| LAB criterion-pass (Harvey held-out)Source | — | 94.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1861 | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | — | 80.6% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified Pass@3Source | — | 87.0% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified Pass³Source | — | 73.1% | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified avg. turnsSource | — | 23.5 turns | Not comparable |
| AutomationBenchSource | — | 26.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 55.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 68.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 30.3% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1720 | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 89.1% | Not comparable |
Coding14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 71.00% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 82.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 50.1% | 55.7% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 38.5% | 53.4% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 96% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 79.2% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 89.5% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | — | 59.4% | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | — | 68.8% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | — | 63.6% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBench (episode 1)Source | — | 83.0% | Not comparable |
| ProgramBenchSource | — | 93.0% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 70.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 78.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 42.7% | 60.7% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.5% | 93.2% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 31.2% | 52.6% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 14.2% | 31.3% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 43.5% | 54.2% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 51.9% | 50.1% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| HLESource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 56.3% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench (raw)Source | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench (length-adjusted)Source | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 59.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench Professional (raw)Source | — | 73.4% | Not comparable |
| BioMysteryBench (human-solvable)Source | — | 90.1% | Not comparable |
| BioMysteryBench (human-difficult)Source | — | 49.4% | Not comparable |
| SpatialBench VerifiedSource | — | 72.5% | Not comparable |
| SingleCellBenchSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| ProteinGym HardSource | — | 47.7% | Not comparable |
| Protein DesignSource | — | 42.5% | Not comparable |
| Organic chemistry V2Source | — | 61.6% | Not comparable |
| Protocols (troubleshooting)Source | — | 61.1% | Not comparable |
| Protocols (understanding)Source | — | 78.4% | Not comparable |
Math7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 43.793% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 22.917% | — | Not comparable |
| IMO 2026Source | — | 42/42 | Not comparable |
| RiemannBench (no tools)Source | — | 60.0% | Not comparable |
| RiemannBench (tools)Source | — | 79.0% | Not comparable |
| ArXivMath Jun. 2026 (no tools)Source | — | 90.8% | Not comparable |
| ArXivMath Jun. 2026 (tools)Source | — | 91.3% | Not comparable |
Multilingual3 benchmarks
Multimodal10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 76.4% | 84.7% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1325 | — | Not comparable |
| Chartography (no tools)Source | — | 29.6% | Not comparable |
| Chartography (tools)Source | — | 83.0% | Not comparable |
| BenchCAD Vision2Code (no tools)Source | — | 0.366 | Not comparable |
| BenchCAD Vision2Code (tools)Source | — | 0.821 | Not comparable |
| GDP.pdf (no tools)Source | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
| GDP.pdf (tools)Source | — | 85.5% | Not comparable |
| OfficeQASource | — | 78.1% | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 66.9% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 43.6% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Opus 5 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 Opus 4.7 and Claude Opus 5 today?
Claude Opus 4.7: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Claude Opus 5: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.