Capability
69.9/100
field median 58.1
#21 of 232 ranked models
Superseded.Anthropic has newer models in this line:Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
Released Apr 16, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision reading
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scores 69.9 out of 100 and ranks #21 of 232. This profile shows 21 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Agentic at #21. API pricing is $5 input and $25 output per million tokens.
Data as of September 4, 2026 · How the score is built
Share or export
Strongest published evidence
Agentic ranks #21. Particularly useful for coding agents, browser research, and computer-use workflows.
Validate before choosing
21 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Independent runtime speed has not been measured.
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Price
$5input / $25 output
input median $1
blended $15
Speed
Not measured
field median 92 tok/s
Time to first token not measured
Context
1Mtokens
field median 256,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) category percentile values
- Agentic87th percentile
- Coding86th percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- Knowledge83rd percentile
- MathNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Multimodal26th percentile
- Instruction followingNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#21/151
- Coding#27/183
- ReasoningNot ranked
- Knowledge#31/181
- MathNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Multimodal#36/48
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
What it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Current modelClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) · 69.9 score · $15 blended per million tokens
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
How much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic6/7 verified
- Coding3/3 verified
- Reasoning1/3 verified
- Knowledge4/4 verified
- Math0/1 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Multimodal2/3 verified
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not published
- Context window
- 1M
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Superseded
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #21 of 151Percentile 87thWeight 22%7 benchmarksMixed sources | 61.0 | #21 of 151 | 87th | 22% | 7 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| CodingRank #27 of 183Percentile 86thWeight 20%3 benchmarksVerified | 59.6 | #27 of 183 | 86th | 20% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%3 benchmarksMixed sources | 49.7 | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 3 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| KnowledgeRank #31 of 181Percentile 83rdWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified | 61.9 | #31 of 181 | 83rd | 12% | 4 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathWeight 5%1 benchmarkReported | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 1 benchmark | Reported |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalRank #36 of 48Percentile 26thWeight 12%3 benchmarksMixed sources | 50.3 | #36 of 48 | 26th | 12% | 3 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Pro | Score64.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 81.2% | Gap16.9 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score87.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap8.4 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score69.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap22.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Agentic7 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score69.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap22.5 behind | WeightWeighted 30% | Provider exact |
| BrowseComp | Score79.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2% | Gap12.9 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| OSWorld-Verified | Score78% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 86.1% | Gap8.1 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| OSWorld 2.0 | Score18.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 72.6% | Gap54.4 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Benchmark exact |
| MCP Atlas | Score77.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1% | Gap10.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CyberGym | Score73.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Fugu Cyber · 86.9% | Gap13.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Secondary exact |
| JobBench | Score45.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.3 · 64.9% | Gap19 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Reasoning3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for AGI v2 | Score75.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 95% | Gap19.2 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Secondary exact |
| ARC-AGI-3Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for AGI v3 | Score0.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 62.7% | Gap62.5 behind | WeightWeighted 15% | Benchmark exact |
| MRCR v2 128K-256KOpenAI MRCR v2 8-needle 128K-256K | Score59.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.5 · 87.5% | Gap28.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Secondary exact |
Knowledge4 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score54.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 65% | Gap10.3 behind | WeightWeighted 35% | Provider exact |
| HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without tools | Score46.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 60.9% | Gap14 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score94.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap1.8 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score94.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0% | Gap1.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Math1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (legacy)FrontierMath legacy aggregate | Score43.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 89% | Gap45.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Secondary exact |
Multimodal3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OfficeQA Pro | Score43.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 66.9% | Gap23.3 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Secondary exact |
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score91% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5% | Gap2.5 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Provider exact |
| CharXiv w/o toolsCharXiv Reasoning without tools | Score82.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 88.9% | Gap6.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. A successor's displayed score stays at least 0.1 points above its predecessor; raw benchmark rows do not move. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
February 2026
Claude Opus 4.6Score 69.8 · $5 / $25
Apr 16, 2026 · you are here
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Score 69.9 · $5 / $25
May 28, 2026
Claude Opus 4.8Score 72.3 · $5 / $25
reasoning · adaptive
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) ranks #21 of 232 on the public leaderboard with a score of 69.94/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is a proprietary model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) sits in the Claude Opus 4.7 family with Claude Opus 4.7. Its explicit predecessor is Claude Opus 4.6. 21 of 422 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Agentic at #21, while its lowest eligible position is Multimodal & Grounded at #36. particularly useful for coding agents, browser research, and computer-use workflows.
Radar
Full release historyClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) release history
Claude Opus 4.7 released
Anthropic · Model release
Source confirmed
Radar confirmed these at the source. Already tracking Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)? See the free Radar Brief for what changes next.
Frequently asked questions
How does Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) ranks #21 out of 232 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 69.94/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 21 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) good for knowledge and understanding?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) ranks #31 out of 181 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 61.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) good for coding and programming?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) ranks #27 out of 183 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 59.6/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) good for mathematics?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) good for reasoning and logic?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) ranks #21 out of 151 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 61/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) ranks #36 out of 48 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 50.3/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Which sibling models are related to Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) belongs to the Claude Opus 4.7 family. Related tracked variants include Claude Opus 4.7. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.
Does Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) currently has 39 source-displayable rows across 422 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has a reported context window of 1M in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.
Compare Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) with every tracked model410 comparisons
Last updated September 4, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Watch Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) in the weekly brief
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.