Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 37.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
TencentSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.5 to 33.0.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Tencent |
| Noometry Index | 58.4 | 37.2 |
| Released | 2026-04-14 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 66 | 12 |
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: 59.9 (#10), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 36.5 (#192)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1519 | 1270 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1557 | — |
| SciCode | 54.5% | — |
| GSO | 44.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | — |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,323 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#8), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 40.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 43.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 21% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1233 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,937 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 53.7 (#24), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 23.9 (#157)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1507 | 1264 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 39% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 93.5% | — |
| CritPt | 12% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 72.8% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 19% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 28% | — |
| DTBench | 94.7% | — |
| LMCA | 52.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.39 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 66.5 (#20), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 33.0 (#179)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1274 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 70.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 73.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#20), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 33.6 (#192)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | 1248 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 41.5 (#29), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 57.5 (#9), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 41.9 (#198)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1481 | 1262 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1530 | 1319 |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | 1258 |
| LMArena French | 1505 | — |
| LMArena German | 1494 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1466 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1497 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 78.6 (#9), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 65.8 (#214)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | 1245 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 46.1 (#24), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 39.5 (#168)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | 1301 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 75.3 (#8), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 47.4 (#209)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1274 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | 1242 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1506 | 1275 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10?
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 37.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 has 12.