LLM ReferenceLLM Reference

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Mistral Large 2

Claude Opus 4.7 (2026) and Mistral Large 2 (2025) are frontier reasoning models from Anthropic and MistralAI. Claude Opus 4.7 ships a 1M-token context window, while Mistral Large 2 ships a 128K-token context window. On pricing, Mistral Large 2 costs $0.48/1M input tokens versus $5/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.

Mistral Large 2 is ~942% cheaper at $0.48/1M; pay for Claude Opus 4.7 only for coding workflow support.

Specs

Released2026-04-162025-11-25
Context window1M128K
Parameters123B
Architecturedecoder onlydecoder only
LicenseProprietaryTrue
Knowledge cutoff2026-012025-07

Pricing and availability

Claude Opus 4.7Mistral Large 2
Input price$5/1M tokens$0.48/1M tokens
Output price$25/1M tokens$2.4/1M tokens
Providers

Capabilities

Claude Opus 4.7Mistral Large 2
Vision
Multimodal
Reasoning
Function calling
Tool use
Structured outputs
Code execution

Benchmarks

No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.

Deep dive

The capability footprint differs most on reasoning mode: Claude Opus 4.7 and code execution: Claude Opus 4.7. Both models share vision, multimodal input, function calling, and tool use, 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, while Mistral Large 2 lists $0.48/1M input and $2.4/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Mistral Large 2 lower by about $9.94 per million blended tokens. Availability is 5 providers versus 4, 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 Mistral Large 2 when vision-heavy evaluation 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. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.

FAQ

Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Mistral Large 2?

Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1M tokens, while Mistral Large 2 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 Mistral Large 2?

Mistral Large 2 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5/1M input and $25/1M output tokens. Mistral Large 2 costs $0.48/1M input and $2.4/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Mistral Large 2 open source?

Claude Opus 4.7 is listed under Proprietary. Mistral Large 2 is listed under True. 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 Mistral Large 2?

Both Claude Opus 4.7 and Mistral Large 2 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 Mistral Large 2?

Both Claude Opus 4.7 and Mistral Large 2 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 Mistral Large 2?

Claude Opus 4.7 is available on Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, GCP Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and OpenRouter. Mistral Large 2 is available on OpenRouter, IBM watsonx, AWS Bedrock, and Mistral AI Studio. 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.