BenchLeader
Menu

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen

Full profiles: Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) and Gemini 4 Hydrogen (Google): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 10 sources

As of 13 Nov 2026, Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen are neck and neck on quality (63.0 vs 63.4 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±3.4 margin), and Gemini 4 Hydrogen is 3.3× cheaper at $3.00 vs $10.00 per 1M tokens blended. Choose Claude Opus 4.7 for agents & tools (65 vs 62) and fast first answers (1.1 s vs 16.4 s); choose Gemini 4 Hydrogen for coding (69 vs 61), knowledge (69 vs 62), and reasoning (70 vs 64), where it also streams 3×+ faster.

Key facts (as of 13 Nov 2026)

  • Claude Opus 4.7 scores 63.0 on the BenchLeader Index and Gemini 4 Hydrogen scores 63.4 (BenchLeader, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Claude Opus 4.7 costs $10.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen costs $3.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen streams 3×+ faster than Claude Opus 4.7 (Artificial Analysis, 7-day median, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Of the 9 benchmarks both models have, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 5 (BenchLeader, 13 Nov 2026).
  • On Arena WebDev, Claude Opus 4.7 is rated 1555 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen 1704 (LMArena, as published by 13 Nov 2026).
Claude Opus 4.7 benchmarks Anthropic Gemini 4 Hydrogen benchmarks high GoogleAdd a third model

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingGemini 4 Hydrogen69 vs 61 category score; Arena WebDev 1704 vs 1555High
Agents & tool useClaude Opus 4.765 vs 62 category score; Terminal-Bench 80.2% vs 56.4%Medium
MathsGemini 4 Hydrogen68 vs 67 category score; Arena Maths 1495 vs 1490Medium
ReasoningGemini 4 Hydrogen70 vs 64 category score; Arena Hard Prompts 1514 vs 1519Medium
KnowledgeGemini 4 Hydrogen69 vs 62 category scoreMedium
Chat quality (human preference)Either67 vs 68 on Arena votesEither
Lowest costGemini 4 Hydrogen$3.00 vs $10.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.120 vs $0.400–
Fastest first answerClaude Opus 4.71.1 s (Claude Opus 4.7) vs 16.4 s (Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)) to the first answer token–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) are neck and neck on quality (63.0 vs 63.4, within the ±3.4 margin).
  • Claude Opus 4.7 is stronger in agents & tools.
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) is stronger in coding, human preference, knowledge, maths, reasoning.
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) is 3.3× cheaper ($3.00 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) streams 3.7× faster (180 vs 48 tokens per second).

At a glance

SpecClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen
DeveloperAnthropicGoogle
Released16 Apr 202612 Nov 2026
Context window (tokens)1,000,0001,048,576
Compared atClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$5.00 / $25.00 / $0.500$1.50 / $7.50 / $0.075

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)Leader
Reasoning63.669.6Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Coding61.168.8Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Agents & tools65.161.9Claude Opus 4.7
Maths66.767.8Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Knowledge62.468.5Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Human preference67.368.2level
Multimodal67.1–not comparable

On one chart

Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.

2550 avg75ReasoningCodingAgents & toolsMathsKnowledgeHumanpreferenceClaude Opus 4.7, Reasoning: 63.6Claude Opus 4.7, Coding: 61.1Claude Opus 4.7, Agents & tools: 65.1Claude Opus 4.7, Maths: 66.7Claude Opus 4.7, Knowledge: 62.4Claude Opus 4.7, Human preference: 67.3Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Reasoning: 69.6Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Coding: 68.8Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Agents & tools: 61.9Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Maths: 67.8Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Knowledge: 68.5Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Human preference: 68.2

Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Instruction following, Long context, Multimodal.

Model, click to add or removeIndex

Where sources disagree

Across the 9 benchmarks both have, Claude Opus 4.7 leads 4, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 5. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Opus 4.7 ahead.

Overall indexClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)Leader
BenchLeader Index63.063.4neck and neck
Arena Text14941490Claude Opus 4.7

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.

MeasureClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
Blended price per 1M tokens$10.00$3.00
Input / output per 1M$5.00 / $25.00$1.50 / $7.50
Cached input per 1M$0.500$0.075
Price per task: chat reply$0.0095$0.0029
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.075$0.022
Price per task: code edit$0.068$0.020
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.400$0.120
Price per task: structured extraction$0.015$0.0045
Agentic coding session, input mostly cached$0.198$0.056
Cost per benchmark task (AA Index)–$1.87
Output tokens per task (AA Index)–85k
Of which reasoning–48k
Time per task (AA Index)–8 min
Output speed48 tok/s180 tok/s
Time to first answer1.1 s16.4 s
Time to a complete answer–63.3 s

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 63.0 and takes 1 s to its first answer token; Claude Opus 4.7 (high) scores 60.8 in 1 s, Claude Opus 4.7 (max) scores 59.4 in 17 s. Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) scores 63.4 and takes 16 s to its first answer token. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

130 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader63.063.4
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader65.161.9
Coding scoreBenchLeader61.168.8
Human preference scoreBenchLeader67.368.2
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader62.468.5
Maths scoreBenchLeader66.767.8
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader67.1–
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader63.669.6
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$10.00$3.00
Output speedBenchLeader48 tok/s180 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader1.1 s16.4 s
Context windowBenchLeader1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub86.4%†–
Humanity's Last ExamScale AI / CAIS36.2%–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench61.7%–
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)15191514
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench–88.6%†
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench87.2%†–
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis91.4%†–
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis42.3%†–
HLE-Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis–54.9%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI90.2%–
Kagi LLM BenchmarkKagi LLM Benchmark73.3%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize0.2%†–
CritPtArtificial Analysis12.0%†–
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis–61.5%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub41.0%†–
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub13.0%–
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub52.2%†–
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub94.7%†–
ForecastBenchForecastBench62.8%–
Coding
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub83.5%†–
SciCodeSciCode54.5%†–
WeirdMLWeirdML76.4%–
FrontierCodeCognition38.5%–
GSO-BenchGSO-Bench44.1%–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15471518
Show all 130 benchmarks
MetricPublisherClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
Coding
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)15551704
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench–78.5%†
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench82.1%†–
LiveCodeBenchVals AI85.1%–
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI82.0%–
Code MigrationVals AI43.9%–
ProgramBenchVals AI0.0%–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI71.0%87.8%†
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAScale AI SEAL40.3%–
SWE Atlas: RefactoringScale AI SEAL48.6%–
SWE Atlas: Test WritingScale AI SEAL38.5%–
MirrorCodeEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub31.1%†–
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub1323.0–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis–54.0%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis83.2%†–
Design Arena WebsiteDesign Arena–1316†
FrontierCode 2.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis–36.3%
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench80.2%56.4%
OSWorld-Verified 2.0OSWorld18.2%†–
APEX-AgentsMercor49.2%†–
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench–61.8%†
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench–77.1%†
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench50.7%†–
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis51.5%†–
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis88.6%†–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI68.5%–
MCP AtlasScale AI SEAL79.1%†–
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL41.7%–
τ³-bench Bankingτ²-bench40.2%†–
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis34.6%†–
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis46.7%†–
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis43.8%†–
Finance Agent v2Vals AI51.5%–
Finance Agent v2.1Vals AI–65.1%†
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1Vals AI–11.3%†
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI6.7%–
Legal Research BenchVals AI38.5%53.9%†
Tax Agent BenchVals AI23.7%52.3%†
Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)Vals AI68.5%–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI–54.0%†
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)1210–
PostTrainBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub24.3%†–
ExploitBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub26.5%–
GBAEvalEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub43.8%–
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs10936.8–
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis–74.4%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis–30.0%
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis–1497
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–41.4%
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub70.2%†–
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub31.7%†–
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub86.7%†–
ProofBenchVals AI54.0%†–
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench92.8%†–
AIME (Vals)Vals AI96.3%–
AIME 2026MathArena95.8%†–
HMMT February 2026MathArena93.9%†–
MathArena ApexMathArena40.6%†–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)14901495
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub51.7%†–
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench–83.2%†
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench–86.8%†
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench78.3%†–
AA-Omniscience v1.1Artificial Analysis–43.7
MMLU-ProVals AI89.9%–
LegalBenchVals AI85.3%–
CorpFinVals AI66.1%–
TaxEvalVals AI75.3%–
CaseLaw v2Vals AI68.4%–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI63.7%–
Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1Vals AI–75.8%†
MedCodeVals AI54.9%–
MedScribeVals AI83.0%–
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub19.1%†–
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub21.0%†–
AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracyArtificial Analysis–48.2%
AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis–91.3%
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench77.9%†–
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench66.7%†–
IFBenchArtificial Analysis58.6%†–
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)14931503
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)14941490
EQ-Bench 4EQ-Bench1293–
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14821492
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)15141476
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)15081514
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1319–
LiveBench DesignLiveBench–77.3%†
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis78.8%†–
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI85.5%–
MortgageTaxVals AI70.3%–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub24.5%–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis78.7%†–
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1494–
MLCRArtificial Analysis–21.1%†
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub157.4–
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench–77.0%†
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench76.5%†–
AA Intelligence Index v5.0Artificial Analysis–50.8
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis40.7†–
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis312.5†–
Vals IndexVals AI–68.5†
Vals Finance IndexVals AI–66.1%†
Vals RSI IndexVals AI19.1%†–
Vals Multimodal IndexVals AI67.4%–

Data as of 2026-11-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high): 10 new results (Arena Text, Arena Hard Prompts, Arena Coding…).
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 score revision.
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 score revision.
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 new result (Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1).
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 score revision.
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 score revision.
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 score revision.
  • Claude Opus 4.7: BenchLeader Index 63.9 → 63.4.

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen: questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Gemini 4 Hydrogen?
Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) are neck and neck on quality (63.0 vs 63.4, within the ±3.4 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 13 Nov 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen: which is cheaper, and will that change?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen is cheaper today: $3.00 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 4 Hydrogen better for coding?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen scores higher in coding (69 vs 61 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Arena WebDev, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 1555 for Claude Opus 4.7 against 1704 for Gemini 4 Hydrogen.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 4 Hydrogen?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen streams 3×+ faster (180 vs 48 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 4 Hydrogen better for agents and tool use?
Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in agentic tasks (65 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Terminal-Bench, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 80.2% for Claude Opus 4.7 against 56.4% for Gemini 4 Hydrogen.
More questions (4)
Which is better for long documents?
Both take about 1M tokens: Claude Opus 4.7 1,000,000, Gemini 4 Hydrogen 1,048,576.
Which has lower latency?
Claude Opus 4.7 answers first: 1.1 s against 16.4 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen?
Across the 9 benchmarks both have, Claude Opus 4.7 leads 4, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 5. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Opus 4.7 ahead.
When was Gemini 4 Hydrogen released?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen was released on 12 Nov 2026.