Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5 Nano
Compare Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-5 Nano side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Classification, OCR, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.
Compare Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5 Nano live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5 Nano: Overview
Claude Opus 4.7 is a proprietary multimodal language model developed by Anthropic, released on April 16, 2026. It is designed for agentic coding, long-horizon task execution, and enterprise knowledge work. The model supports text and vision inputs and operates with a context window of up to 1,000,000 tokens. It introduces adaptive thinking, which dynamically allocates reasoning based on task complexity, along with configurable effort controls including a new xhigh setting that sits between the existing high and max levels. It achieves 87.6% on SWE-bench Verified and 78.0% on OSWorld-Verified, reflecting strong performance on autonomous software engineering and computer use tasks respectively.
Compared to Claude Opus 4.6, version 4.7 shows improved instruction following and higher reliability in extended agentic tasks. Vision capabilities now support high-resolution inputs up to 2,576px on the long edge (~3.75 megapixels), more than three times the resolution of prior Claude models, enabling finer interpretation of dense diagrams, UI screenshots, and document layouts. These improvements, combined with self-verification on long-running tasks and a new task budget system for controlling agentic loops, make it well-suited for complex software engineering, technical analysis, and multimodal vision workflows.
GPT-5 Nano, released by OpenAI on August 7, 2025, is the smallest and most cost-efficient model in the GPT-5 family. Like its larger counterparts, it is multimodal—accepting text and images, supporting tool use, structured outputs, and reasoning—but it is optimized for speed, low latency, and affordability. It features input and output token limits of roughly 272K and 128K tokens respectively, enabling large-context processing even at its compact scale. Its knowledge cutoff is around May 2024, slightly earlier than the full GPT-5 model.
GPT-5 Nano is well-suited for high-volume or cost-sensitive deployments such as mobile apps, embedded AI systems, or rapid-response APIs. While it offers less depth on complex reasoning and coding tasks compared to GPT-5 Mini or Pro, it retains core multimodal and agentic capabilities, making it an attractive option where efficiency and scale matter more than maximum performance.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5 Nano Comparison Table
| Property | Claude Opus 4.7 | GPT-5 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Apr 2026 | Aug 2025 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 400K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $5.00 | $0.050 |
| Output $/1M | $25.00 | $0.400 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Visual Understanding | ||
| Overall Score | 67.16% | 58.21% |
| Avg Response Time | 4.85s | 6.58s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 2.4K | 1.8K |
| Median output tokens | 110 | 591 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.015 | $0.0003 |
| Defect Detection | 73.3%(11/15) | 86.7%(13/15) |
| Document Understanding | 77.8%(7/9) | 66.7%(6/9) |
| Object Counting | 20%(2/10) | 0%(0/10) |
| Object Understanding | 85.7%(12/14) | 64.3%(9/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 68.4%(13/19) | 57.9%(11/19) |
| OCR | ||
| Overall Score | 86.9% | 69% |
| Avg Response Time | 4.19s | 6.15s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 969 | 122 |
| Median output tokens | 81 | 539 |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0069 | $0.0002 |
| Focused Scene OCR | 88.9%(88/99) | 64.6%(64/99) |
| Handwritten Math | 80%(8/10) | 40%(4/10) |
| License Plate Recognition | 93.3%(28/30) | 83.3%(25/30) |
| Text Recognition | 86.7%(26/30) | 70%(21/30) |
| VQA & Extraction | 81.7%(49/60) | 73.3%(44/60) |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology