Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Holo3.1-35B-A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 #12 (Supported); Holo3.1-35B-A3B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 and Holo3.1-35B-A3B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 21 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7; 1 to Holo3.1-35B-A3B.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Claude Opus 4.7 only
- 21
- Holo3.1-35B-A3B only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.7 and Holo3.1-35B-A3B is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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.
Claude Opus 4.7 is priced at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.25 input / $1.80 output per 1M tokens for Holo3.1-35B-A3B. Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Holo3.1-35B-A3B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.7 | Holo3.1-35B-A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.7$5 input / $25 output | Holo3.1-35B-A3B$0.25 input / $1.8 output | Holo3.1-35B-A3B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.7Not available | Holo3.1-35B-A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.7Not available | Holo3.1-35B-A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.71M | Holo3.1-35B-A3B262K | Claude Opus 4.7 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Holo3.1-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 42.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 31.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 14.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 43.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 51.9% | — | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Holo3.1-35B-A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 43.6% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Opus 4.7 and Holo3.1-35B-A3B 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 Holo3.1-35B-A3B today?
Claude Opus 4.7: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Holo3.1-35B-A3B: $0.25 input / $1.80 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
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.