Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 57× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Google

37.0

Rank #211 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 10 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 53.8 to 22.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 76.4% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 35.2% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.337.0
Released2026-04-142025-06-17
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.40
Results tracked6633

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), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
WeirdML76.4%35.2%
LMArena Coding15181373
ALE-Bench1,323325.9
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
LMArena WebDev1558—
SciCode54.5%—
GSO44.1%—
MirrorCode31.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents49.2%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—36.9%
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), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%40.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061377
DTBench94.7%62.8%
LMCA52.2%18.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25133.94
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
CritPt12%—
Chess Puzzles30%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Math14991373
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench54%—
Omni-MATH—48%
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), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%3.3%
LMArena Expert15211373
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
MMLU-Pro—53.7%
GPQA (HELM)—30.9%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Vision13161198
VPCT—30%
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Non-English14801369
LMArena Chinese15311404
LMArena French15031388
LMArena German14951389
LMArena Japanese14721359
LMArena Korean14641360
LMArena Russian14941373
LMArena Spanish14951396

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Instruction Following14981367
IFEval—81%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Longer Query15051373
Fiction.LiveBench—47.2%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
LMArena Text14901379
LMArena Creative Writing14861367
LMArena Multi-Turn15051366
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
WildBench—81.8%
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 57× 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 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper