Claude Opus 4.7 vs Flint
Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Quick take
- •Claude Opus 4.7 is meaningfully stronger at coding (94 vs 3 on our capability index).
- •Flint is open-weights (free to self-host); Claude Opus 4.7 is paid API only.
Specs comparison
| Claude Opus 4.7 | Flint | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Springboards |
| Type | Closed source | Closed source |
| Context window | ✓1M | Not announced |
| Input / 1M tokens | $5.00 | ✓Not announced |
| Output / 1M tokens | $25.00 | Not announced |
| Release date | 2026-04 | 2026-04 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Flint |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 87.6% | - |
| SWE-bench Pro | 64.3% | - |
| Novelty Bench | - | 7/10 |
| Intra-Model Similarity | - | 0.721 |
| NoveltyBench | - | 7.47 |
Scores sourced from official provider release posts and independent benchmark aggregators.
Which should you choose?
Choose Claude Opus 4.7 if...
- →You have a pipeline pinned to Opus 4.7 and need stability
- →Your workload is vision-heavy and benefits from higher-resolution image input
- →You need top-tier coding with 1M context but haven't migrated to 4.8 yet
- →You want documented, broadly available Opus-class behavior
Choose Flint if...
- →When exploring diverse creative directions
- →For early-stage ideation and concept generation
- →When variety and novelty are more important than accuracy