Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Llama 2-7B

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #3 Confirmed

Llama 2-7B Meta

28.6

Rank #315 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 79.5 to 15.1.
  • Llama 2-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index68.528.6
Released2026-09-222023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked3529

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.4 (#1), Llama 2-7B: 28.7 (#302)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
LMArena Coding15451002
FrontierCode54.4%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1820—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
MirrorCode77.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2), Llama 2-7B: 15.1 (#309)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts15451009
ARC-AGI-292.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
EBR-Bench71.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
BIG-Bench Hard—39.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—98.54
HellaSwag—77.2%
LAMBADA—73.3%
PIQA—78.8%
WinoGrande—69.2%

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#231)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math—1042
GSM8K—16.7%

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9), Llama 2-7B: 27.7 (#243)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
LMArena Expert15641036
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—45.9%
BoolQ—77.9%
MMLU—45.8%
OpenBookQA—58.6%
TriviaQA—73.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
Furniture Assembly83.3%—
ScienceQA—43.1%

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1), Llama 2-7B: 23.9 (#288)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
LMArena Non-English1513973
LMArena Chinese1572973
LMArena Russian1532995
LMArena French—969
LMArena German—978
LMArena Spanish—1007

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2), Llama 2-7B: 51.0 (#293)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
LMArena Instruction Following15351006

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#282)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
LMArena Longer Query1540999

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3), Llama 2-7B: 28.1 (#293)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama 2-7B
LMArena Text15181053
LMArena Creative Writing15381033
LMArena Multi-Turn15201029
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Llama 2-7B?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama 2-7B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Llama 2-7B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper