Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 12 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic
Coding
88.8
Overall
57.6
Output $/M
$20.00
12
Step 3.7 FlashStepFun
Coding
No data
Overall
19.5
Output $/M
$1.15
0
vs boards won of 12 shared

Decision reading

Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a coding score, 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Step 3.7 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Step 3.7 Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 17.4x less.

Shared results
12
Claude Opus 5.5 only
95
Step 3.7 Flash only
6
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 5.5 88.8 from 5 benchmarks, Step 3.7 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 40.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: Claude Opus 5.5 2147.4 against Step 3.7 Flash 694.1, 48.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 5.5 $20.00 against Step 3.7 Flash $1.15 per million output tokens, 17.4x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 5.5 takes 1M tokens, Step 3.7 Flash 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 5.5BarsStep 3.7 FlashTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
Web design70
General10
All shared boards120
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
LiveBench coding96.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev1807Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured39.6Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)65.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)90.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)66.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)18.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)95.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)87.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)30.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)74.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SciCode66.9%43.9%Claude Opus 5.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured35.6%Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
FrontierCode54.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierSWE62.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MirrorCode77.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ALE-Bench2147.4694.1Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: coding1545Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1538Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1855Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1753Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1753Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index57.619.5Claude Opus 5.5
Epoch Capabilities Index168.8Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index24 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1317Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1312Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1356Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench research85.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench browser80.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench long agentic85.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)33.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)58.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)45.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)50.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)9.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)75.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)47.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vals Science Index58.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)91.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)14.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)14.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured98.5%Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
APEX-Agents73.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Remote Labor Index21.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SpireClimb3.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,235Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Search1213Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
LiveBench reasoning92.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.9%Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)61.4%21.4%Claude Opus 5.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ARC-AGI98.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ARC-AGI-293.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Chess puzzles67.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles71.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
EBR-bench71.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1536Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: expert1549Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1535Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1345Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1362Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 391.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 495.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProofBench100.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: math1518Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1516Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
MedCode (Vals AI)49.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SimpleQA Verified72.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: science1524Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1509Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1518Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1494Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites13361196Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: UI components13941179Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: game dev14571158Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: data viz13971172Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: 3D14771129Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: all code categories13901182Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: SVG13331085Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1152Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
LiveBench design86.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
Vals Index70.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench data analysis80.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)70.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)45.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)91.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IFBenchNot measured67.3%Only Step 3.7 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.7%73.7%Claude Opus 5.5
DTBench98.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMCA68.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Furniture assembly83.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text1516Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1537Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1535Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision1321Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: English1519Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1507Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1582Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1534Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: French1493Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1508Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1517Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1501Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1532Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1532Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1515Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: English1317Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1326Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1320Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Step 3.7 FlashLeader
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

Claude Opus 5.5$0.014Fits in one request
Step 3.7 Flash$0.0008Fits in one request

Step 3.7 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$0.260Fits in one request
Step 3.7 Flash$0.013Fits in one request

Step 3.7 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 5.5$1.00Fits in one request
Step 3.7 Flash$0.051Fits in one request

Step 3.7 Flash 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.

Specifications of Claude Opus 5.5 and Step 3.7 Flash
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 5.5StepFun Step 3.7 Flash
MakerAnthropicStepFun
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026May 28, 2026
Context window1M262K
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.20
Output $/Mtok$20.00$1.15
Coding index88.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it50
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Step 3.7 Flash for coding?

Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a coding score, 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Step 3.7 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Step 3.7 Flash has the edge where output tokens cost 17.4x less.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20 and $1.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 5.5 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Claude Opus 5.5, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 5.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash comparison based on?

12 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 5.5's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and Step 3.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next