Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Magistral Medium

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Magistral Medium Mistral AI

35.2

Rank #227 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Magistral Medium in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 53.8 to 8.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 93.5% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 6.1% for Magistral Medium.
  • Magistral Medium is cheaper at $2 / $5 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Magistral Medium has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7 and Magistral Medium specifications
Claude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
ProviderAnthropicMistral AI
Noometry Index58.335.2
Released2026-04-142025-03-17
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K16K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2
Output $ / M tokens$25$5
Results tracked6622

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), Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
SciCode54.5%39.2%
LMArena Coding15181319
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Magistral Medium: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
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), Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
ARC-AGI-275.8%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%16.2%
ARC-AGI-193.5%6.1%
CritPt12%0.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061267
SimpleBench61.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
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), Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
LMArena Math14991250
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), Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
LMArena Expert15211223
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Magistral Medium: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
LMArena Non-English14801232
LMArena Chinese15311227
LMArena French15031267
LMArena German14951248
LMArena Japanese14721175
LMArena Korean14641125
LMArena Russian14941224
LMArena Spanish14951271

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
LMArena Instruction Following14981254

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
LMArena Longer Query15051295

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Magistral Medium
LMArena Text14901255
LMArena Creative Writing14861245
LMArena Multi-Turn15051275
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Magistral Medium?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 3.6× 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 Magistral Medium?

Magistral Medium is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $5 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Magistral Medium better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.7 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Magistral Medium share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Medium has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper