Claude Opus 4.7 vs Claude Opus 4.8
Side-by-side comparison using current list prices and the live leaderboard.
Verdict
Claude Opus 4.8 ranks higher at a similar price.
- Claude Opus 4.8 ranks higher on the LMRank leaderboard (#2 vs #3).
- Both cost $5.00 per 1M input tokens.
- Both have a 1M-token context window.
At a Glance
| Attribute | Claude Opus 4.7 | Claude Opus 4.8 |
|---|---|---|
| Lab | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Leaderboard rank | #3 | #2 |
| Tags | Intelligent Reasoning Multimodal Agentic | Intelligent Reasoning Multimodal Agentic |
| Context | 1M tokens | 1M tokens |
| Input price | $5.00/1M | $5.00/1M |
| Output price | $25.00/1M | $25.00/1M |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
Claude Opus 4.7: strengths
- Top-tier complex reasoning and code generation
- Strong gains on SWE-bench Pro (+10.9%)
- MCP-Atlas improvement of +14.6%
- Supports adaptive-only thinking with 'xhigh' effort
Claude Opus 4.8: strengths
- Top-tier coding and reasoning benchmarks
- 1M token context window
- Strong agentic workflow support
- Wide cloud provider availability
Claude Opus 4.7: weaknesses
- Slower output speed (52 t/s)
- High time-to-first-token (18.38s)
- Token inflation from new tokenizer
- Superseded by Opus 4.8 shortly after release
Claude Opus 4.8: weaknesses
- Higher latency (58.7 tokens/s output)
- Premium pricing vs. median models
- No extended thinking budgets or top-p sampling
- Verbose output above median token usage
Claude Opus 4.7: best for
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Code generation and debugging
- Agentic and autonomous workflows
- Long-context research analysis
Claude Opus 4.8: best for
- Complex code generation and codebase migrations
- Agentic orchestration and long-form analysis
- Research synthesis with large contexts
- End-to-end project planning