Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 62.6 to 19.5.
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 58.3 | 32.7 |
| Released | 2026-04-14 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 66 | 16 |
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), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1518 | 1210 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | — |
| 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 (#10), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 53.8 (#29), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1506 | 1208 |
| 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 | 156.25 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1208 |
| 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% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |
| 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), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1480 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1531 | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | 1187 |
| LMArena French | 1503 | — |
| LMArena German | 1495 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1464 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1495 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | 1186 |
| IFEval | — | 78% |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | 1194 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1490 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | 1199 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1505 | 1221 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 35.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.