Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs 94× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT Google

43.5

Rank #92 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 9 categories and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 53.8 to 21.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 76.4% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 35.2% for Gemma 4 26B A4B IT.
  • Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper at $0.0675 / $0.23 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.343.5
Released2026-04-142026-04-02
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.0675
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.23
Results tracked6628

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), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 39.0 (#164)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena WebDev15581359
SciCode54.5%40%
WeirdML76.4%35.2%
LMArena Coding15181447
ALE-Bench1,323927.17
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
GSO44.1%—
MirrorCode31.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
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), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 21.8 (#213)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
CritPt12%0%
Chess Puzzles30%6%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061439
DTBench94.7%74.9%
LMCA52.2%29.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25141.85
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 47.6 (#67)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%82.2%
LMArena Math14991470
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
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), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 45.7 (#85)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
GPQA Diamond90.2%73.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%5.2%
LMArena Expert15211447
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—

Multimodal Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 40.6 (#46)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Vision13161260
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 53.1 (#71)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Non-English14801421
LMArena Chinese15311495
LMArena French15031460
LMArena Russian14941434
LMArena Spanish14951417
LMArena German1495—
LMArena Japanese1472—
LMArena Korean1464—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 74.8 (#82)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Instruction Following14981420

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 43.6 (#91)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Longer Query15051428

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Gemma 4 26B A4B IT: 58.6 (#115)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
LMArena Text14901434
LMArena Creative Writing14861402
EQ-Bench Creative Writing19141305
LMArena Multi-Turn15051441
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Gemma 4 26B A4B IT?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 4 26B A4B IT costs 94× 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 Gemma 4 26B A4B IT?

Gemma 4 26B A4B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.0675 per million input tokens and $0.23 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemma 4 26B A4B IT better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.7 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 4 26B A4B IT has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper