Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.6 (2026) and Claude Opus 4.7 (2026) are frontier-tier reasoning models from Anthropic. Claude Opus 4.6 ships a 1M-token context window, while Claude Opus 4.7 ships a 1M-token context window. On SWE-bench Verified, Claude Opus 4.7 leads by 6.8 pts. On pricing, Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5/1M input tokens versus $5/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding; Claude Opus 4.6 is better when coding workflow support matters more.
Specs
| Released | 2026-02-05 | 2026-04-16 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | decoder only | decoder only |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-12 | 2026-01 |
Pricing and availability
| Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Opus 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $5/1M tokens | $5/1M tokens |
| Output price | $25/1M tokens | $25/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Opus 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | ||
| Multimodal | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Function calling | ||
| Tool use | ||
| Structured outputs | ||
| Code execution |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.6 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 80.8 | 87.6 |
| SWE-bench Pro | 45.2 | 64.3 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, SWE-bench Verified has Claude Opus 4.6 at 80.8 and Claude Opus 4.7 at 87.6, with Claude Opus 4.7 ahead by 6.8 points; SWE-bench Pro has Claude Opus 4.6 at 45.2 and Claude Opus 4.7 at 64.3, with Claude Opus 4.7 ahead by 19.1 points. The largest visible gap is 19.1 points on SWE-bench Pro, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint is close: both models cover vision, multimodal input, reasoning mode, function calling, and tool use. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.
For cost, Claude Opus 4.6 lists $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens, while Claude Opus 4.7 lists $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Claude Opus 4.6 lower by about $0 per million blended tokens. Availability is 4 providers versus 5, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Opus 4.6 when coding workflow support are central to the workload. Choose Claude Opus 4.7 when coding workflow support and broader provider choice are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.6 supports 1M tokens, while Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1M tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.6 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens. Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.7 open source?
Claude Opus 4.6 is listed under Proprietary. Claude Opus 4.7 is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.7?
Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.7 expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Opus 4.6 or Claude Opus 4.7?
Both Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.7 expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Where can I run Claude Opus 4.6 and Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.6 is available on OpenRouter, Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, and GCP Vertex AI. Claude Opus 4.7 is available on Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and OpenRouter. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-04-24. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.