Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.6
Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Specs comparison
| Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Type | Closed source | Closed source |
| Context window | ✓1M | Not announced |
| Input / 1M tokens | $5.00 | 5 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $25.00 | 30 |
| Release date | 2026-04 | 2026-06 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 87.6% | - |
| SWE-bench Pro | 64.3% | - |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Sol) | - | 88.8% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Terra) | - | 82.5% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Luna) | - | 84.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | - | 88.8 |
| ExploitBench | - | Competitive with Anthropic Mythos Preview |
| ExploitGym | - | Significant improvements |
| GeneBench v1 | - | Not announced |
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 GPT-5.6 if...
- →You want to standardize on one model generation but route requests across cost/quality tiers
- →You are an approved preview partner exploring the newest OpenAI capabilities
- →Workloads spanning agentic coding, knowledge work, and research where tier flexibility helps