Compare / Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.4 Nano

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.4 Nano

20 results from 4 sources that measured both models. Each row is in the source's own units; there is no overall winner.

Claude Opus 4.7
Anthropic · profile
GPT-5.4 Nano
OpenAI · profile
Results compared
20
Shared sources
4
BenchmarkMetricClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.4 Nano
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,4771,418
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedBusiness, management and financeArena rating 1,5081,405
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedCreative writingArena rating 1,4881,335
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedExpert promptsArena rating 1,5351,438
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedInstruction followingArena rating 1,5031,387
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,5021,401
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedWriting, literature and languageArena rating 1,4961,362
Artificial AnalysisreportedArtificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score 73.656.1
Artificial AnalysisreportedArtificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score 40.720.7
Artificial AnalysisreportedGPQA Diamond% of questions 91.4%81.7%
Artificial AnalysisreportedHumanity's Last Exam% of questions 42.3%28.3%
Artificial AnalysisreportedIFBench% of instructions 58.6%75.9%
Artificial AnalysisreportedLong-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions 78.7%76.7%
Artificial AnalysisreportedTerminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks 83.1%60.7%
Artificial AnalysisreportedTerminal-Bench Hard% of tasks 54.5%42.4%
Artificial AnalysisreportedΤ-bench banking% of tasks 34.6%27.4%
Artificial AnalysisreportedΤ²-bench telecom% of tasks 88.6%76.0%
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI)reportedCorrect answers% of questions 51.7%11.7%
Vectara Hallucination LeaderboardreportedAnswer rate% of documents 98.0%100.0%
Vectara Hallucination LeaderboardreportedHallucination rate% of summaries 12.0%3.1%

Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.