Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7 VS OpenAI GPT-5.6 Terra
Decision Recommendation
⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Claude Opus 4.7 is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 0.9% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: GPT-5.6 Terra is 1.8x cheaper to run. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, GPT-5.6 Terra 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.
Was this recommendation helpful?
Model Specs
Claude Opus 4.7
Benchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+0.9%)
64.3%excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+1.3%)
94.2%graduate-level science QA
Cost & Performance
Cost (per 1M tokens)
$10.00Input: $5.00 | Output: $25.00Context Window
1M tokensModel Specs
GPT-5.6 Terra
Benchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-pro)
63.4%excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
92.9%graduate-level science QA
Cost & Performance
Cost (per 1M tokens)1.8x cheaper
$5.63Input: $2.50 | Output: $15.00Context WindowLarger
1.05M tokensFrequently Asked Questions about Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.6 Terra comparison
GPT-5.6 Terra is cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7. GPT-5.6 Terra has a blended cost of $5.63/1M tokens, which is about 1.8x cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7 at $10.00/1M tokens.
Claude Opus 4.7 is better for coding tasks on this benchmark. It scores 64.3% on swe-bench-pro (excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases) compared to GPT-5.6 Terra which scores 63.4%.
Related Matchups
Explore similar comparisons for Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5.6 Terra.