Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 47.9 to 15.7.
  • Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 specifications
Claude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
ProviderAnthropicNVIDIA
Noometry Index58.336.7
Released2026-04-14—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked6611

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 Ultra 253b v1: 38.4 (#177)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Coding15181312
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 15.7 (#149)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents49.2%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—10%
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 Ultra 253b v1: 26.3 (#134)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Hard Prompts15061316
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 Ultra 253b v1: 37.5 (#152)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Math14991360
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 Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
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), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
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 Ultra 253b v1: 43.1 (#187)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Non-English14801282
LMArena Russian14941284
LMArena Chinese1531—
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 Ultra 253b v1: 69.0 (#178)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Instruction Following14981308

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 39.5 (#177)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Longer Query15051299

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 52.2 (#175)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
LMArena Text14901320
LMArena Creative Writing14861314
LMArena Multi-Turn15051317
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper