Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 45.0 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.

Last verified . 48 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

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 66.7 to 32.5.
  • 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.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index58.345.0
Released2026-04-142025-03-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$5$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$10
Results tracked6678

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 Pro: 42.4 (#101)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
SWE-bench Verified83.5%57.6%
LMArena WebDev15581227
SciCode54.5%42.8%
GSO44.1%3.9%
WeirdML76.4%54%
LMArena Coding15181452
ALE-Bench1,323785.52
FrontierCode38.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—53.6%
Aider Polyglot—83.1%
LiveBench Coding—85.9%
MirrorCode31.1%—
CadEval—64%
AlgoTune—1.51

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
Terminal-Bench80.2%32.6%
τ²-bench Banking40.2%13.7%
LMArena Search12331142
Vending-Bench 210,937573.64
APEX-Agents49.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
GDPval—23.3%
Remote Labor Index—0.8%
TheAgentCompany—30.3%
DeepResearch Bench—42.8%
PostTrainBench28.6%—
BALROG—43.3%
ExploitBench26.5%—
GBAEval43.8%—
GDP.pdf21%—
METR Time Horizons—55.4%

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.8 (#29), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
ARC-AGI-275.8%4.9%
SimpleBench61.7%62.4%
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%70.3%
ARC-AGI-193.5%41%
CritPt12%2%
Chess Puzzles30%20%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061455
DTBench94.7%82.4%
LMCA52.2%34.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25145.32
ForecastBench60.361.3
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
EnigmaEval—5.6%
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
LiveBench Reasoning—89.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—79.9%
LiveBench—82.3%

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%24.6%
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%84.7%
LMArena Math14991450
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%14.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%4.2%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
ProofBench54%—
Omni-MATH—41.6%
LiveBench Math—90.2%
MATH Level 5—95.9%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
GPQA Diamond90.2%85.3%
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%21.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%7%
LMArena Expert15211452
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
MMLU-Pro—86.3%
Confabulations—10.6%
GPQA (HELM)—74.9%

Multimodal Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Vision13161263
LMArena Document14951421
GeoBench—86%
VPCT—48%
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
SpatialViz-Bench—44.7%

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Non-English14801451
LMArena Chinese15311507
LMArena French15031472
LMArena German14951487
LMArena Japanese14721461
LMArena Korean14641434
LMArena Russian14941461
LMArena Spanish14951473

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Instruction Following14981437
LiveBench Instruction Following—80.6%
IFEval—84%

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Longer Query15051449
Fiction.LiveBench—91.7%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 2.5 Pro
LMArena Text14901458
LMArena Creative Writing14861454
EQ-Bench Creative Writing19141421
LMArena Multi-Turn15051453
Short-Story Creative Writing—83.8%
WildBench—85.7%
EQ-Bench 41311—
LiveBench Language—67.8%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 45.0 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: 59.6 versus 42.4 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.

Related comparisons

Go deeper