Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.1-Codex-mini

Claude Opus 4.7 has enough public results to be ranked (#19); GPT-5.1-Codex-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

GPT-5.1-Codex-mini OpenAI

37.3

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 2 categories and GPT-5.1-Codex-mini in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 59.6 to 31.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Terminal-Bench: 80.2% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 61.6% for GPT-5.1-Codex-mini.
  • GPT-5.1-Codex-mini is cheaper at $0.25 / $2 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 400K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index58.337.3
Released2026-04-142025-11-12
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M400K
Max output128K128K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$2
Results tracked662

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-5.1-Codex-mini: 31.6

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
LMArena WebDev15581244
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
LMArena Coding1518—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: 38.5

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
Terminal-Bench80.2%61.6%
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 Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.8 (#29), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
CritPt12%—
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), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
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), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
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), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
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), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
LMArena Instruction Following1498—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
LMArena Longer Query1505—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), GPT-5.1-Codex-mini: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.1-Codex-mini
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 GPT-5.1-Codex-mini?

Claude Opus 4.7 has enough public results to be ranked (#19); GPT-5.1-Codex-mini does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-5.1-Codex-mini?

GPT-5.1-Codex-mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $2 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-5.1-Codex-mini better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.7 does, with 1M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.1-Codex-mini share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.1-Codex-mini has 2.

Related comparisons

Go deeper