# Claude Opus 4.7 vs phi-3-medium 14B

> Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-phi-3-medium-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 3 categories and phi-3-medium 14B in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 62.6 to 9.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 90.2% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 27.6% for phi-3-medium 14B.
- phi-3-medium 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 58.3 | 29.7 |
| Rank | 19 | 306 |
| Context | 1M | — |
| Input $/M | $5 | — |
| Output $/M | $25 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.7: 59.6 (#13)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | — |
| SciCode | 54.5% | — |
| GSO | 44.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1518 | — |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 48.7% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,323 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.25 | 121.23 |
| 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% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1506 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 28% | — |
| DTBench | 94.7% | — |
| LMCA | 52.2% | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| 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% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1499 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 17.6% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | 27.6% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| MMLU | — | 78% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1480 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1531 | — |
| LMArena French | 1503 | — |
| LMArena German | 1495 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1464 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1495 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | — |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1490 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1505 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than phi-3-medium 14B?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and phi-3-medium 14B share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.