Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-4o mini

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 38× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

GPT-4o mini OpenAI

25.5

Rank #343 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4o mini in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.7 to 10.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 97.8% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 6.9% for GPT-4o mini.
  • GPT-4o mini is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index58.325.5
Released2026-04-142024-07-18
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M128K
Max output128K16K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.15
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.60
Results tracked6660

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), GPT-4o mini: 22.0 (#335)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
WeirdML76.4%11.8%
LMArena Coding15181290
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
Aider Polyglot—3.6%
LMArena WebDev1558—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.1%
LiveBench Coding—43.1%
MirrorCode31.1%—
BigCodeBench Complete—57.4%
ALE-Bench1,323—
HumanEval+—83.5%
MBPP+—72.2%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), GPT-4o mini: 27.5 (#101)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents49.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
PostTrainBench28.6%—
BALROG—17.4%
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), GPT-4o mini: 8.7 (#347)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
ARC-AGI-275.8%0%
SimpleBench61.7%10.7%
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%28.8%
Chess Puzzles30%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061267
Mystery Game Puzzles28%12%
DTBench94.7%54.4%
LMCA52.2%10.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25126.56
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
CritPt12%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
LiveBench Reasoning—32.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—50%
ForecastBench60.3—
LiveBench—41.3%
PIQA—88.7%

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), GPT-4o mini: 10.4 (#314)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%0.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%6.9%
LMArena Math14991267
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
ProofBench54%—
Omni-MATH—28%
LiveBench Math—36.3%
MATH Level 5—52.6%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—
GSM8K—91.3%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), GPT-4o mini: 17.7 (#284)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
GPQA Diamond90.2%37.7%
SimpleQA Verified51.7%8.3%
LMArena Expert15211235
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
MMLU-Pro—60.3%
Confabulations—37.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
GPQA (HELM)—36.8%
BoolQ—88.7%
MMLU—81.8%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), GPT-4o mini: 25.9 (#122)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
LMArena Vision13161066
Video-MME—64.8%
GeoBench—64%
VPCT—34%
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), GPT-4o mini: 42.0 (#199)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
LMArena Non-English14801266
LMArena Chinese15311265
LMArena French15031297
LMArena German14951272
LMArena Japanese14721216
LMArena Korean14641195
LMArena Russian14941275
LMArena Spanish14951276

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), GPT-4o mini: 61.9 (#239)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
LMArena Instruction Following14981258
LiveBench Instruction Following—56.8%
IFEval—78.2%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), GPT-4o mini: 39.1 (#186)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
LMArena Longer Query15051289

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), GPT-4o mini: 39.5 (#248)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4o mini
LMArena Text14901286
LMArena Creative Writing14861268
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914873
LMArena Multi-Turn15051285
Short-Story Creative Writing—67.2%
WildBench—79.1%
EQ-Bench 41311—
LiveBench Language—28.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than GPT-4o mini?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 25.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 38× 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 GPT-4o mini?

GPT-4o mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-4o mini better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 22.0 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 GPT-4o mini share?

32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4o mini has 60.

Related comparisons

Go deeper