Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Devstral Small 2505

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Devstral Small 2505 costs 67× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Devstral Small 2505 Mistral AI

34.3

Rank #233 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 2 categories and Devstral Small 2505 in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 53.8 to 19.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 80.7% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 37.7% for Devstral Small 2505.
  • Devstral Small 2505 is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Devstral Small 2505 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7 and Devstral Small 2505 specifications
Claude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
ProviderAnthropicMistral AI
Noometry Index58.334.3
Released2026-04-142025-05-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output128K128K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.30
Results tracked664

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), Devstral Small 2505: 38.9 (#166)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
SciCode54.5%28.8%
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—56.4%
LMArena WebDev1558—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
LMArena Coding1518—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Devstral Small 2505: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
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), Devstral Small 2505: 19.7 (#252)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%37.7%
CritPt12%0%
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
Chess Puzzles30%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1506—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA52.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Devstral Small 2505: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench54%—
LMArena Math1499—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), Devstral Small 2505: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
LMArena Expert1521—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Devstral Small 2505: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Devstral Small 2505: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
LMArena Non-English1480—
LMArena Chinese1531—
LMArena French1503—
LMArena German1495—
LMArena Japanese1472—
LMArena Korean1464—
LMArena Russian1494—
LMArena Spanish1495—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Devstral Small 2505: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
LMArena Instruction Following1498—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Devstral Small 2505: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
LMArena Longer Query1505—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Devstral Small 2505: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Devstral Small 2505
LMArena Text1490—
LMArena Creative Writing1486—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—
LMArena Multi-Turn1505—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Devstral Small 2505?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Devstral Small 2505 costs 67× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Devstral Small 2505?

Devstral Small 2505 is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Devstral Small 2505 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.7 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Devstral Small 2505 share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Devstral Small 2505 has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper