Model comparison
AI Co-Mathematician vs Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 has enough public results to be ranked (#17); AI Co-Mathematician does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. AI Co-Mathematician scores higher in 1 category and Claude Opus 4.7 in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where AI Co-Mathematician leads 71.7 to 66.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 75.6% for AI Co-Mathematician and 31.7% for Claude Opus 4.7.
Side by side
| AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 57.6 | 58.4 |
| Released | 2026-05-08 | 2026-04-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $5 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $25 |
| Results tracked | 2 | 66 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 59.9 (#10)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 83.5% |
| FrontierCode | — | 38.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1557 |
| SciCode | — | 54.5% |
| GSO | — | 44.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 76.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1519 |
| MirrorCode | — | 31.1% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,323 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#8)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 80.2% |
| APEX-Agents | — | 49.2% |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 18.2% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 40.2% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 28.6% |
| ExploitBench | — | 26.5% |
| GBAEval | — | 43.8% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 21% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1233 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 10,937 |
Reasoning Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 53.7 (#24)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 75.8% |
| SimpleBench | — | 61.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 80.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 93.5% |
| CritPt | — | 12% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 30% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 72.8% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 19% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1507 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 28% |
| DTBench | — | 94.7% |
| LMCA | — | 52.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 156.39 |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.3 |
Math AI Co-Mathematician leads
AI Co-Mathematician: 71.7, Claude Opus 4.7: 66.5 (#20)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 75.6% | 31.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 47.9% | 22.9% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 70.2% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 73.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 97.8% |
| ProofBench | — | 54% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1499 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 43.8% |
Knowledge Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#20)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.2% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 36.2% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 51.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1521 |
Multimodal Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 41.5 (#29)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1317 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 24.5% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 33.3% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1495 |
Multilingual Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 57.5 (#9)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1481 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1530 |
| LMArena French | — | 1505 |
| LMArena German | — | 1494 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1472 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1466 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1494 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1497 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 78.6 (#9)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1498 |
Long Context Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 46.1 (#24)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1505 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
AI Co-Mathematician: —, Claude Opus 4.7: 75.3 (#8)
| Benchmark | AI Co-Mathematician | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1491 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1486 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1914 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1506 |
Frequently asked questions
Is AI Co-Mathematician better than Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.7 has enough public results to be ranked (#17); AI Co-Mathematician does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do AI Co-Mathematician and Claude Opus 4.7 share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. AI Co-Mathematician has 2 scored results on Noometry and Claude Opus 4.7 has 66.