Claude Opus 4.7 vs Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B
Wins 5 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents
Wins 1 of 6 areas
Following instructions
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger all-rounder.Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B is better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 17 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 software30Claude Opus 4.73 of 3 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Claude Opus 4.73 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own20Claude Opus 4.72 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Opus 4.72 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Opus 4.71 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B1 of 1 test
Long documents and following instructions 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 tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Opus 4.7 pulls ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+62.5points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+43.1points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+39.4points ahead
Where Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B pulls ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+21.8points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 17 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 62.583.120.6+62.5
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Opus 4.7 by 30.351.521.2+30.3
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.7 by 19.754.534.8+19.7
AgentsClaude Opus 4.7
- GDPValClaude Opus 4.7 by 42.842.80+42.8
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingClaude Opus 4.7 by 24.534.610.1+24.5
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.7
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Opus 4.7 by 30.342.312+30.3
- GPQA DiamondClaude Opus 4.7 by 15.691.475.8+15.6
- CritPtClaude Opus 4.7 by 11.4120.6+11.4
FactsClaude Opus 4.7
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.7 by 43.157.714.6+43.1
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.7 by 30.648.918.3+30.6
Following instructionsNemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B
- IFBenchNemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B by 21.858.680.4+21.8
Other results5 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 78.827.3-51.5+78.8
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Opus 4.7 by 48.373.625.3+48.3
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Opus 4.7 by 35.839.53.7+35.8
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Opus 4.7 by 35.488.653.2+35.4
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.7 by 2940.711.7+29
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 or Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B?
Claude Opus 4.7 wins five of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts and long documents. Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B wins following instructions.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7. It wins 3 of the 3 coding tests both models report; Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 17 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 12 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 5 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.