Compare
Llama 4 Behemoth vs Claude Opus 4.7
Meta vs Anthropic. Specs, benchmarks, and real per-task cost — all in one page.
Verdict
Claude Opus 4.7 leads on LMSYS ELO (1412 vs 1342). Llama 4 Behemoth is ~7.7× cheaper on a 3:1 input:output blend. Llama 4 Behemoth is open-weights, the other is proprietary.
Meta
Llama 4 BehemothMeta’s open-weights flagship. 405B params, fully open license, runs on every major inference provider.
Best open-weights modelRuns anywhereTransparent training
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic’s frontier reasoning model. Leads SWE-Bench and holds top ranks on long-context coding and agentic workflows.
Best-in-class coding agent behaviorStrong instruction following1M-token context with high recallHigh reliability under tool use
Pricing
Input / 1M$2.50$15.00
Output / 1M$8.00$75.00
Context256K1.0M
Max output16K64K
LicenseOpen weightsProprietary
Released2025-12-102026-03-12
Benchmarks
LMSYS ELO1342.01412.0
MMLU Pro87.192.8
HumanEval89.394.4
SWE-Bench52.472.1
MATH81.589.3
GPQA56.266.4
MMMU—79.2
IFEval88.092.1
Per-task cost
Summarize a 1-hour meeting transcript$0.041$0.263
Review a 500-line pull request$0.036$0.270
Answer a customer support ticket$0.014$0.105
Extract structured data from a resume$0.021$0.150
Debug a stack trace with context$0.031$0.240
Per-call cost using published token counts for each task. Real-world prompts vary.