Claude Opus 4.7 vs Llama 4
2026 - Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Quick take
- •Llama 4 is open-weights - free to self-host with no API costs. Claude Opus 4.7 requires paid API access.
- •Llama 4 has a 10M context window - 50x larger than Claude Opus 4.7's 200K. Better for long documents and large codebases.
- •Llama 4 is open-source: fine-tune it, self-host it, or use any inference provider. Claude Opus 4.7 is closed-source.
Specs comparison
| Claude Opus 4.7 | Llama 4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Type | Closed source | Open source |
| Context window | 200K | ✓10M |
| Input / 1M tokens | $15.00 | ✓Free (self-host) |
| Output / 1M tokens | $75.00 | Free (self-host) |
| Release date | 2025-09 | 2025-04 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Llama 4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | ~75% | - |
| MMLU | ~90% | ~85% |
| HumanEval | ~95% | - |
Scores sourced from official provider release posts.
Strengths
Claude Opus 4.7
- ✓Best-in-class multi-step reasoning
- ✓Strong scientific and mathematical analysis
- ✓Superior long-context comprehension
- ✓Highly accurate instruction following
- ✓Best Anthropic model for research and analysis
Llama 4
- ✓Fully open weights - no usage restrictions
- ✓10M context in Llama 4 Scout variant
- ✓Native multimodal support
- ✓Strong performance relative to size
- ✓Enormous ecosystem of community tools and fine-tunes
Which should you choose?
Choose Claude Opus 4.7 if you need...
- →Complex research tasks
- →High-stakes code generation
- →Long-document analysis
- →Scientific reasoning
Choose Llama 4 if you need...
- →Self-hosted and on-premise deployments
- →Privacy-sensitive workloads
- →Custom fine-tuning
- →Researchers and open-source builders