Claude Opus 4.7 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Opus 4.7 Verdict
- Claude Opus 4.7 leads on quality: 65.6 vs 60.4.
- Claude Opus 4.7 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is stronger in long context.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is 1.7× cheaper ($6.00 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 65.6 | 60.4 |
| Agents & tools score | 69.4 | 54.6 |
| Coding score | 64.8 | 57.1 |
| Composite score | 80.4 | 67.5 |
| Human preference score | 69.1 | 62.0 |
| Instruction following score | 58.7 | 56.9 |
| Knowledge score | 66.5 | 62.3 |
| Long context score | 65.9 | 66.6 |
| Maths score | 65.4 | 62.7 |
| Multimodal score | 65.7 | 60.6 |
| Reasoning score | 66.6 | 65.2 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $6.00 |
| Output speed | 43 tok/s | 42 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 21.7 s | 2.2 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 87.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 85.8% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 75.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | 53.4% |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | – |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | – |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | 24.3% |
| GSO-Bench | 44.1% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.3 | 152.3 |
| LMArena Text | 1495 | 1472 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1519 | 1504 |
| LMArena Coding | 1547 | 1528 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1557 | 1521 |
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | 1282 |
| LMArena Agent | – | -1 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 40.7 | 30.4 |
| IFBench | 58.6% | 56.6% |
| AA-LCR | 78.7% | 80.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | 78.8% | 73.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 27.3 | 12.2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 51.5% | 53.0% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 91.4% | 87.5% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 42.3% | 33.6% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 50.1% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 88.6% | 79.5% |
| AIME (Vals) | 96.3% | 92.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | 85.1% | 82.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | 89.9% | 87.3% |
| IOI | 47.1% | – |
| LegalBench | 85.3% | 82.1% |
| CorpFin | 66.1% | 65.3% |
| TaxEval | 75.3% | 77.1% |
| MedQA | – | 92.1% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 68.5% | 57.3% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 82.0% | 77.4% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 90.2% | 85.6% |
| Vals Index | 56.1 | 50.6 |
| MCP Atlas | – | 69.5% |
| HiL-Bench | 41.7% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | 1207 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 73.3% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Claude Sonnet 4.6?
- Claude Opus 4.7 leads on quality: 65.6 vs 60.4. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 4.7 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Claude Sonnet 4.6 for coding?
- Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in coding (65 vs 57 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Claude Sonnet 4.6 for agentic tasks?
- Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in agentic tasks (69 vs 55 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Claude Sonnet 4.6?
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is cheaper: $6.00 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.7 or Claude Sonnet 4.6?
- Claude Opus 4.7 streams faster: 43 against 42 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.