Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Claude Sonnet 5
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 #12 (Supported); Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Sonnet 5 share 12 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7; 24 to Claude Sonnet 5.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Claude Opus 4.7 only
- 9
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 24
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Sonnet 5 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Claude Opus 4.7 is priced at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Sonnet 5.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Opus 4.7 | Δ | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 581.9 |
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 576.7 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 557.4 |
| Math | Claude Opus 4.738.6 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 5Not measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.7Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 588.3 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Sonnet 5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.7$5 input / $25 output | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Claude Sonnet 5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.7Not available | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.7Not available | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.71M | Claude Sonnet 51M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Sonnet 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 74% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 65.59% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 20.7% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 13.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 84.7% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 57.4% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 81.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1607 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 46.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 55.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1388 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 39.2% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 90.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 28.2% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
Coding11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Sonnet 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 71.00% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 82.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 50.1% | 53.6% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 38.5% | 42.7% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 85.2% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 63.2% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 78.3% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | — | 28.1% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 61.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 71.5% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Sonnet 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 42.7% | 53.4% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.5% | 91.1% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 31.2% | 39.6% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 14.2% | 15.3% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 43.5% | 38.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 51.9% | 37.3% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| HLESource | — | 57.4% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 43.2% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Sonnet 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 43.6% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Sonnet 5 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Claude Opus 4.7 and Claude Sonnet 5 today?
Claude Opus 4.7: $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens Claude Sonnet 5: $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.