Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Command R+

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R+ costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Command R+ Cohere

32.4

Rank #257 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Command R+ 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 9.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 52.2% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 5% for Command R+.
  • Command R+ is cheaper at $2.50 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Command R+
ProviderAnthropicCohere
Noometry Index58.332.4
Released2026-04-142024-08-30
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output128K4K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$25$10
Results tracked6634

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), Command R+: 29.1 (#309)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
LMArena Coding15181187
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—33.8%
LiveBench Coding—19.1%
MirrorCode31.1%—
BigCodeBench Complete—41.9%
ALE-Bench1,323—
HumanEval+—56.7%
MBPP+—63.5%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Command R+: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
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), Command R+: 9.2 (#344)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
SimpleBench61.7%17.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061186
DTBench94.7%54.9%
LMCA52.2%5%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25119.34
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
CritPt12%—
Chess Puzzles30%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
LiveBench Reasoning—24.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—38.1%
ForecastBench60.3—
LiveBench—31.8%

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Command R+: 28.9 (#242)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
LMArena Math14991188
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench54%—
LiveBench Math—21.3%
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), Command R+: 36.4 (#169)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%6.9%
LMArena Expert15211174
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
MMLU—69.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Command R+: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Command R+: 38.6 (#227)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
LMArena Non-English14801216
LMArena Chinese15311226
LMArena French15031209
LMArena German14951216
LMArena Japanese14721166
LMArena Korean14641138
LMArena Russian14941227
LMArena Spanish14951189

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Command R+: 60.0 (#254)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
LMArena Instruction Following14981197
LiveBench Instruction Following—57.6%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Command R+: 37.3 (#219)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
LMArena Longer Query15051230

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Command R+: 43.5 (#228)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Command R+
LMArena Text14901229
LMArena Creative Writing14861235
LMArena Multi-Turn15051213
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—
LiveBench Language—29.7%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Command R+?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R+ costs 2.3× 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 Command R+?

Command R+ is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 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 Command R+ better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.7 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Command R+ share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Command R+ has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper