Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Nemotron 3 Super

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index. Nemotron 3 Super costs 58× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Nemotron 3 Super NVIDIA

40.1

Rank #153 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Nemotron 3 Super 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 18.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 76.4% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 38% for Nemotron 3 Super.
  • Nemotron 3 Super is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.45 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Nemotron 3 Super has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7 and Nemotron 3 Super specifications
Claude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
ProviderAnthropicNVIDIA
Noometry Index58.340.1
Released2026-04-142026-03-11
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.08
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.45
Results tracked6621

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), Nemotron 3 Super: 39.4 (#158)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
SciCode54.5%36%
WeirdML76.4%38%
LMArena Coding15181403
ALE-Bench1,323213.9
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
GSO44.1%—
MirrorCode31.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Nemotron 3 Super: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
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), Nemotron 3 Super: 18.7 (#276)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
NYT Connections (extended)39%15.4%
CritPt12%3.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061386
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
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), Nemotron 3 Super: 39.6 (#101)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%60.4%
LMArena Math14991380
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
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), Nemotron 3 Super: 38.9 (#139)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Expert15211398
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Nemotron 3 Super: —

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

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Nemotron 3 Super: 48.4 (#144)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Non-English14801355
LMArena Chinese15311432
LMArena French15031405
LMArena German14951341
LMArena Russian14941336
LMArena Spanish14951417
LMArena Japanese1472—
LMArena Korean1464—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Nemotron 3 Super: 71.2 (#154)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Instruction Following14981347

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Nemotron 3 Super: 41.5 (#139)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Longer Query15051362

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Nemotron 3 Super: 55.9 (#140)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Text14901378
LMArena Creative Writing14861317
LMArena Multi-Turn15051369
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Nemotron 3 Super?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index. Nemotron 3 Super costs 58× 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 Nemotron 3 Super?

Nemotron 3 Super is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.45 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Nemotron 3 Super better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 39.4 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 Nemotron 3 Super share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Nemotron 3 Super has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper