# Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

> Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 44.9 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-gemini-2-5-pro
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 48

## Summary

- They share 48 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemini 2.5 Pro in 2 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.5 to 31.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 75.8% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 4.9% for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
- Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper at $1.25 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
- Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google |
| Noometry Index | 58.4 | 44.9 |
| Rank | 17 | 67 |
| Context | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $5 | $1.25 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $10 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.7: 59.9 (#10)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.8 (#86)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | 57.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1557 | 1227 |
| SciCode | 54.5% | 42.8% |
| GSO | 44.1% | 3.9% |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | 54% |
| LMArena Coding | 1519 | 1452 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,323 | 785.52 |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 53.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 83.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 85.9% |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | — |
| CadEval | — | 64% |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.51 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#8)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.1 (#81)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | 32.6% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 40.2% | 13.7% |
| LMArena Search | 1233 | 1142 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,937 | 573.64 |
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | — |
| GDPval | — | 23.3% |
| Remote Labor Index | — | 0.8% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 30.3% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 42.8% |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | — |
| BALROG | — | 43.3% |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 43.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 21% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 55.4% |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.7: 53.7 (#24)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#85)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | 62.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | 70.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 93.5% | 41% |
| CritPt | 12% | 2% |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1507 | 1455 |
| DTBench | 94.7% | 82.4% |
| LMCA | 52.2% | 34.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.39 | 145.32 |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | 61.3 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 39% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.6% |
| Thematic Generalization | 72.8% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 19% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 89.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 28% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 79.9% |
| LiveBench | — | 82.3% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.7: 66.5 (#20)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 31.9 (#191)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 70.2% | 24.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | 0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | 84.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | 14.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | 4.2% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 73.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 90.2% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 95.9% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#20)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.8 (#41)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | 85.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | 21.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | 7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | 1452 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 86.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 10.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 74.9% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.7: 41.5 (#29)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 44.5 (#16)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | 1263 |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | 1421 |
| GeoBench | — | 86% |
| VPCT | — | 48% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 44.7% |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.7: 57.5 (#9)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.5 (#30)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1481 | 1452 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1530 | 1507 |
| LMArena French | 1505 | 1473 |
| LMArena German | 1494 | 1487 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | 1462 |
| LMArena Korean | 1466 | 1435 |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | 1460 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1497 | 1473 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.7: 78.6 (#9)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.2 (#71)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | 1436 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 80.6% |
| IFEval | — | 84% |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.7: 46.1 (#24)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.7 (#5)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | 1449 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 91.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.7: 75.3 (#8)
- Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.9 (#60)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1458 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | 1453 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | 1421 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1506 | 1453 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83.8% |
| WildBench | — | 85.7% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 67.8% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 44.9 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Pro costs 2.9× 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 Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 2.5 Pro better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 42.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share?

48 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78.