Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs DeepSeek LLM 67B

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

DeepSeek LLM 67B DeepSeek

24.9

Rank #347 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and DeepSeek LLM 67B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.7 to 8.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 97.8% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 0.8% for DeepSeek LLM 67B.
  • DeepSeek LLM 67B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7 and DeepSeek LLM 67B specifications
Claude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Noometry Index58.324.9
Released2026-04-142023-11-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked6615

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 59.6 (#13), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.9 (#278)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
LMArena Coding15181096
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), DeepSeek LLM 67B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents49.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
PostTrainBench28.6%—
ExploitBench26.5%—
GBAEval43.8%—
GDP.pdf21%—
LMArena Search1233—
Vending-Bench 210,937—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.8 (#29), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 16.5 (#304)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
Chess Puzzles30%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061070
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25110.5
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
CritPt12%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA52.2%—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.7 (#324)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%0.8%
LMArena Math14991108
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
ProofBench54%—
MATH Level 5—6.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.0 (#313)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
GPQA Diamond90.2%24.6%
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
LMArena Expert1521—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), DeepSeek LLM 67B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.4 (#267)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
LMArena Non-English14801073
LMArena Chinese15311132
LMArena French1503—
LMArena German1495—
LMArena Japanese1472—
LMArena Korean1464—
LMArena Russian1494—
LMArena Spanish1495—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.4 (#277)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
LMArena Instruction Following14981079

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#265)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
LMArena Longer Query15051092

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.6 (#282)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7DeepSeek LLM 67B
LMArena Text14901105
LMArena Creative Writing14861067
LMArena Multi-Turn15051082
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than DeepSeek LLM 67B?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or DeepSeek LLM 67B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and DeepSeek LLM 67B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper