Claude Opus 4.7 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B
Claude Opus 4.7 (2026) and Llama 4 Maverick 17B (2025) are frontier reasoning models from Anthropic and AI at Meta. Claude Opus 4.7 ships a 1m-token context window, while Llama 4 Maverick 17B ships a 128k-token context window. On Google-Proof Q&A, Claude Opus 4.7 leads by 27.1 pts. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
Llama 4 Maverick 17B is ~3233% cheaper at $0.15/1M; pay for Claude Opus 4.7 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Opus 4.7 | Llama 4 Maverick 17B |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | multimodal apps and provider-routed production |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 1m | 128k |
| Cheapest output | $25/1M tokens | $0.60/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 7 tracked | 2 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | Google-Proof Q&A leader | 1 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Opus 4.7 leads the largest shared benchmark signal on Google-Proof Q&A by 27.1 points.
- Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Claude Opus 4.7 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Claude Opus 4.7 uniquely exposes Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Claude Opus 4.7 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Llama 4 Maverick 17B has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $0.60/1M tokens.
- Local decision data tags Llama 4 Maverick 17B for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Opus 4.7
$10,250
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Anthropic
Llama 4 Maverick 17B
$270
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $9,980. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on AWS Bedrock and OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Llama 4 Maverick 17B is $24.40/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use before moving production traffic.
- Provider overlap exists on AWS Bedrock, OpenRouter, and OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Claude Opus 4.7 is $24.40/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Claude Opus 4.7 adds Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-04-16 | 2025-10-01 |
| Context window | 1m | 128k |
| Parameters | — | 17 |
| Architecture | decoder only | - |
| License | Proprietary | Open Weights |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-01 | 2024-08 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Opus 4.7 | Llama 4 Maverick 17B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $5/1M tokens | $0.15/1M tokens |
| Output price | $25/1M tokens | $0.60/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Opus 4.7 | Llama 4 Maverick 17B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Function calling | Yes | No |
| Tool use | Yes | No |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | Yes |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Llama 4 Maverick 17B |
|---|---|---|
| Google-Proof Q&A | 94.2 | 67.1 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, Google-Proof Q&A has Claude Opus 4.7 at 94.2 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B at 67.1, with Claude Opus 4.7 ahead by 27.1 points. The largest visible gap is 27.1 points on Google-Proof Q&A, 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 differs most on reasoning mode: Claude Opus 4.7, function calling: Claude Opus 4.7, and tool use: Claude Opus 4.7. Both models share vision, multimodal input, structured outputs, and code execution, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
For cost, Claude Opus 4.7 lists $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while Llama 4 Maverick 17B lists $0.15/1M input and $0.60/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Llama 4 Maverick 17B lower by about $10.71 per million blended tokens. Availability is 7 providers versus 2, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Claude Opus 4.7 when coding workflow support, larger context windows, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Llama 4 Maverick 17B when coding workflow support and lower input-token cost 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 4.7 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B?
Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1m tokens, while Llama 4 Maverick 17B supports 128k 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 4.7 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B?
Llama 4 Maverick 17B is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens. Llama 4 Maverick 17B costs $0.15/1M input and $0.60/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B open source?
Claude Opus 4.7 is listed under Proprietary. Llama 4 Maverick 17B is listed under Open Weights. 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 4.7 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B?
Both Claude Opus 4.7 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 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 4.7 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B?
Both Claude Opus 4.7 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 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 4.7 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B?
Claude Opus 4.7 is available on Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and OpenRouter. Llama 4 Maverick 17B is available on AWS Bedrock and OpenRouter. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-04. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.