Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Step 3.5 Flash

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.5 Flash costs 67× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Step 3.5 Flash StepFun

42.3

Rank #116 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Step 3.5 Flash 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 22.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 39% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 28.4% for Step 3.5 Flash.
  • Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.
  • Step 3.5 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
ProviderAnthropicStepFun
Noometry Index58.342.3
Released2026-04-142026-01-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M256K
Max output128K256K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.30
Results tracked6619

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), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.4 (#105)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Coding15181436
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Step 3.5 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
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), Step 3.5 Flash: 22.2 (#202)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
NYT Connections (extended)39%28.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061411
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
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), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.6 (#84)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%66.8%
LMArena Math14991408
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), Step 3.5 Flash: 39.6 (#132)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Expert15211421
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Step 3.5 Flash: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Step 3.5 Flash: 50.5 (#119)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Non-English14801385
LMArena Chinese15311447
LMArena French15031421
LMArena German14951405
LMArena Japanese14721354
LMArena Korean14641352
LMArena Russian14941385
LMArena Spanish14951419

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Step 3.5 Flash: 73.1 (#124)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following14981385

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.8 (#117)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Longer Query15051402

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Step 3.5 Flash: 58.8 (#113)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Step 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text14901403
LMArena Creative Writing14861357
LMArena Multi-Turn15051405
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Step 3.5 Flash?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.5 Flash costs 67× 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 Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Step 3.5 Flash better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.7 does, with 1M tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Step 3.5 Flash share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.5 Flash has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper