Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.7 to 35.5.
  • Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct specifications
Claude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
ProviderAnthropicNVIDIA
Noometry Index58.337.6
Released2026-04-142024-12-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked6614

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), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 35.9 (#216)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Coding15181272
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.7%
MirrorCode31.1%—
BigCodeBench Complete—48.2%
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
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), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 25.0 (#152)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts15061266
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%—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA52.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 35.5 (#182)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Math14991271
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
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), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 34.1 (#199)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Expert15211242
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 40.5 (#217)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14801245
LMArena Chinese15311263
LMArena Russian14941227
LMArena French1503—
LMArena German1495—
LMArena Japanese1472—
LMArena Korean1464—
LMArena Spanish1495—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 65.9 (#213)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14981252

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 37.6 (#215)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query15051238

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 48.4 (#203)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct
LMArena Text14901283
LMArena Creative Writing14861269
LMArena Multi-Turn15051275
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper