Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 36 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google

40.8

Rank #144 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 36 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 10 categories and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 53.8 to 22.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 70.2% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 27.7% for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.25 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.340.8
Released2026-04-142026-03-03
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.50
Results tracked6638

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), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 37.8 (#188)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena WebDev15581256
SciCode54.5%41.9%
WeirdML76.4%52.2%
LMArena Coding15181400
ALE-Bench1,323797.73
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
GSO44.1%—
MirrorCode31.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 30.2 (#79)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents49.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
DeepResearch Bench—37.3%
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), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 22.9 (#186)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%67.2%
NYT Connections (extended)39%8.2%
CritPt12%1.1%
Chess Puzzles30%25%
Thematic Generalization72.8%63.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061407
DTBench94.7%76.8%
LMCA52.2%35%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25144.47
ForecastBench60.354.4
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
EnigmaEval—3%
EBR-Bench19%—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 40.7 (#90)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%27.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%80%
LMArena Math14991428
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
ProofBench54%—
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), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 41.9 (#104)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond90.2%81.8%
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%8.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%8.2%
LMArena Expert15211398
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 39.4 (#60)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Vision13161240
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 52.3 (#86)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Non-English14801411
LMArena Chinese15311461
LMArena French15031424
LMArena German14951429
LMArena Japanese14721413
LMArena Korean14641392
LMArena Russian14941420
LMArena Spanish14951421

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 72.7 (#131)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Instruction Following14981377

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 42.5 (#122)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Longer Query15051394

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 60.9 (#94)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Text14901416
LMArena Creative Writing14861401
LMArena Multi-Turn15051417
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 18× 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 Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite share?

36 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper