Agnes 2.5 Pro Beta vs Claude Opus 4.7
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Long documents
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Coding · Images and charts
Claude Opus 4.7 wins more areas, narrowly.Agnes 2.5 Pro Beta is better at long documents.
Scores updated · 15 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Claude Opus 4.72 of 2 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video01Claude Opus 4.71 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Agnes 2.5 Pro Beta1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own11Even1 each
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking11Even1 each · 1 tie
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Images and charts and long documents rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Opus 4.7 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+32.1points ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+13.4points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+5.7points ahead
Where Agnes 2.5 Pro Beta pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+9.5points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+4.3points ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+3.7points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 15 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Opus 4.7
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Opus 4.7 by 13.469.783.1+13.4
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.7 by 5.748.854.5+5.7
AgentsEven
- GDPValClaude Opus 4.7 by 1.241.442.6+1.2
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingAgnes 2.5 Pro Beta by 1.135.734.6+1.1
ReasoningEven
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.7 by 4.837.542.3+4.8
- CritPtAgnes 2.5 Pro Beta by 3.715.712+3.7
- GPQA Diamondtie90.591.4tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.7 by 32.116.848.9+32.1
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationAgnes 2.5 Pro Beta by 9.567.257.7+9.5
Images and chartsClaude Opus 4.7
- MMMU-ProClaude Opus 4.7 by 3.475.478.8+3.4
Long documentsAgnes 2.5 Pro Beta
- AA-LCRAgnes 2.5 Pro Beta by 4.38378.7+4.3
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.7 by 37.8-10.527.3+37.8
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Opus 4.7 by 11.362.373.6+11.3
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.7 by 5.535.240.7+5.5
- AA Agentic IndexAgnes 2.5 Pro Beta by 4.343.839.5+4.3
Questions people ask
Which is better, Agnes 2.5 Pro Beta or Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.7 wins two of the six areas where both have results: coding and images and charts. Agnes 2.5 Pro Beta wins long documents. They are level on agents, reasoning and facts.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Agnes 2.5 Pro Beta wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 15 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.