Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.4 Pro
Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.4 Pro score almost the same on the Noometry Index (58.3 vs 58.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 1 category and GPT-5.4 Pro in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.4 Pro leads 70.7 to 53.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 30% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 58.6% for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- Claude Opus 4.7 is cheaper at $5 / $25 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.4 Pro.
- GPT-5.4 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 58.3 | 58.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-14 | 2026-03-05 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | $30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | $180 |
| Results tracked | 66 | 16 |
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), GPT-5.4 Pro: 43.2 (#90)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 76.4% | 57.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | — |
| SciCode | 54.5% | — |
| GSO | 44.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1518 | — |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,323 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GPT-5.4 Pro leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 53.8 (#29), GPT-5.4 Pro: 70.7 (#13)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | 83.3% |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | 74.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 93.5% | 94.5% |
| CritPt | 12% | 30% |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | 58.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.25 | 158.93 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 39% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 23.8% |
| Thematic Generalization | 72.8% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 19% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1506 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 28% | — |
| DTBench | 94.7% | — |
| LMCA | 52.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
Math GPT-5.4 Pro leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), GPT-5.4 Pro: 72.4 (#22)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 70.2% | 82.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | 58.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | 50% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | 37.5% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 73.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1499 | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.4 Pro leads
Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), GPT-5.4 Pro: 68.3 (#7)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | 94.6% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | 44.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | 46.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | 8.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), GPT-5.4 Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1490 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1505 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than GPT-5.4 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.4 Pro score almost the same on the Noometry Index (58.3 vs 58.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-5.4 Pro?
Claude Opus 4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-5.4 Pro better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 43.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.4 Pro share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.4 Pro has 16.