# Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemma 2B

> Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-gemma-2b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and Gemma 2B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 75.1 to 24.0.
- Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google |
| Noometry Index | 58.3 | 29.6 |
| Rank | 19 | 307 |
| Context | 1M | — |
| Input $/M | $5 | — |
| Output $/M | $25 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.7: 59.6 (#13)
- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1518 | 1010 |
| 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 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 20.7% |
| MBPP+ | — | 34.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10)
- Gemma 2B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 53.8 (#29)
- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1506 | 989 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.25 | 94.2 |
| 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% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 35.2% |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 71.4% |
| PIQA | — | 77.3% |
| WinoGrande | — | 65.4% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26)
- Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1009 |
| 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% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 17.7% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23)
- Gemma 2B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 42.1% |
| BoolQ | — | 69.4% |
| MMLU | — | 42.3% |
| TriviaQA | — | 53.2% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38)
- Gemma 2B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10)
- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1480 | 958 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1531 | 986 |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | 937 |
| LMArena French | 1503 | — |
| LMArena German | 1495 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1464 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1495 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10)
- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | 970 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25)
- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | 981 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8)
- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1490 | 1002 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | 987 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1505 | 945 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Gemma 2B?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemma 2B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemma 2B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2B has 23.