whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.7

VS
Google

Gemini 2.5 Pro

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Claude Opus 4.7 is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 64.3% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: Gemini 2.5 Pro is 2.9x cheaper to run and delivers 2.4x faster throughput. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, Gemini 2.5 Pro offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Claude Opus 4.7 fully justifies the cost.

Model Specs

Claude Opus 4.7

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+)
64.3%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+9.8%)
94.2%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$10.00Input: $5.00 | Output: $25.00
Speed
48.1 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/A
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
84.4%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)2.9x cheaper
$3.44Input: $1.25 | Output: $10.00
Speed2.4x faster
117 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7. Gemini 2.5 Pro has a blended cost of $3.44/1M tokens, which is about 2.9x cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7 at $10.00/1M tokens.

Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster than Claude Opus 4.7. Gemini 2.5 Pro generates 117 tokens per second (tps) compared to Claude Opus 4.7 which generates 48.1 tokens per second.

Claude Opus 4.7 is better for coding tasks. It scores 64.3% on coding evaluations (swe-bench-pro) compared to Gemini 2.5 Pro which scores N/A.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard