Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.7 Code
Claude Opus 4.7 leads Kimi K2.7 Code on coding, 67.5 to 53.4 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Kimi K2.7 Code costs 6.3x less per output token ($4.00 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 31 benchmarks have a result for both.
Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.7 Code: which to pick
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 53.4 for Kimi K2.7 Code.
Pick Kimi K2.7 Code for output tokens 6.3x cheaper ($4.00 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.35 against $2.95).
- Shared results
- 31
- Claude Opus 4.7 only
- 72
- Kimi K2.7 Code only
- 20
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 scores 67.5 against 53.4.
4 benchmarks behind each score
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 leads, 40.7 against 25.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 leads, 38.6 against 21.0.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a GPQA Diamond result, 90.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a AIME result, 96.3%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a MMLU Pro result, 89.9%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Kimi K2.7 Code has a Design Arena: websites result, 1263.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 takes 1M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code
Claude Opus 4.7 $0.018, Kimi K2.7 Code $0.0029 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
Kimi K2.7 Code
Claude Opus 4.7 $2.95, Kimi K2.7 Code $0.35.
Published attempt cost and pass rate
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Opus 4.7 67.5 from 4 benchmarks, Kimi K2.7 Code 53.4 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 16.8 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Vending-Bench 2: Claude Opus 4.7 $10,937 against Kimi K2.7 Code $5,083, 36.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Opus 4.7 $25.00 against Kimi K2.7 Code $4.00 per million output tokens, 6.3x apart.
- Context window
- Claude Opus 4.7 takes 1M tokens, Kimi K2.7 Code 262K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Claude Opus 4.7 | Bars | Kimi K2.7 Code | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 13 | 0 | 1 tie | |
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 3 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 5 | 0 | ||
| Math | 3 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 0 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 27 | 3 | 1 tie |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index130
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | 1474 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| AA Coding Index | 73.6 | 60.8 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 85.1% | 82.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 82.0% | 78.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 71.0% | 47.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 43.9% | 25.4% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | 0.0% | Tie |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 68.5% | 67.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.0% | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 47.8% | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 54.5% | 44.7% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | 30.1% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| GSO-Bench | 44.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | 54.1% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 886.2 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1519 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1516 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1560 | 1475 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1554 | 1451 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | 1577 | 1513 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 40.7 | 25.8 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.8 | 150.1 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 38.6 | 21.0 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1176 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | Not measured | 1175 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1143 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1138 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | Not measured | 1147 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: agents building games | Not measured | 1130 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | Not measured | 1151 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | Not measured | 1129 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 51.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 23.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 63.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 88.6% | 90.1% | Kimi K2.7 Code |
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | 37.6% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $10,937 | $5,083 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LMArena Search | 1230 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 85.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 91.4% | 89.6% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 42.3% | 35.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 90.2% | 87.9% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| ARC-AGI | 93.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | 57.9% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Chess puzzles | 41.0% | 14.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Mystery game puzzles | 28.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| EBR-bench | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1506 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1521 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1508 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1336 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1337 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 96.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.8% | 95.6% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 70.2% | 54.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 31.7% | 12.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| ProofBench | 54.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1498 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1509 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 89.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 85.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 68.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 66.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 75.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 70.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 54.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | 36.5% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: science | 1508 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1504 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1490 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | 45.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1263 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1255 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1220 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1227 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1240 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1252 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1176 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1196 | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 56.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 83.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Vals Multimodal Index | 67.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| IFBench | 58.6% | 63.1% | Kimi K2.7 Code |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 78.7% | 79.3% | Kimi K2.7 Code |
| DTBench | 94.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMCA | 52.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Surface Evolver Bench | Not measured | 48.8% | Only Kimi K2.7 Code measured |
| Furniture assembly | 33.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1490 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1498 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1486 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1496 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1480 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1531 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1474 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1464 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1503 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1494 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1494 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1489 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1505 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1505 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1492 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1474 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1322 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1371 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1327 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | 1309 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | 1278 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1326 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Kimi K2.7 Code | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Kimi K2.7 Code costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7 | MoonshotAI Kimi K2.7 Code |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | Moonshot AI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | April 16, 2026 | June 12, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $5.00 | $0.95 |
| Output $/Mtok | $25.00 | $4.00 |
| Coding index | 67.5 | 53.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | $2.95 | $0.35 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Kimi K2.7 Code for coding?
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 53.4 for Kimi K2.7 Code. Pick Kimi K2.7 Code for output tokens 6.3x cheaper ($4.00 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.35 against $2.95).
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.7 Code?
Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Kimi K2.7 Code costs $0.95 and $4.00. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Claude Opus 4.7 costs $2.95 and Kimi K2.7 Code $0.35.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Kimi K2.7 Code?
Claude Opus 4.7, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.7 vs Kimi K2.7 Code comparison based on?
31 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.7's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2.7 Code's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.