latentbrief

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro supports a wider range of input modalities, while Claude Opus 4.7 emphasizes text-focused operations with ethical reasoning.

Specs

MetricClaude Opus 4.7Gemini 3.1 Pro
Context window1M tokens1.0M tokens
Input $/1M tokens$5.00$2.00
Output $/1M tokens$25.00$12.00
ModalitiesText · ImageAudio · File · Image · Text · Video
Open weightsNoNo

How they differ

Input modalities

Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 supports text and image inputs.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro supports text, image, audio, file, and video inputs.

Context handling

Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 allows up to 1,000,000 tokens of context, favoring extensive text-based discussions.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro supports up to 1,048,576 tokens of context, slightly more than Claude, accommodating broader input scope.

Cost profile

Claude Opus 4.7

Claude Opus 4.7 charges $5.0/1M input tokens and $25.0/1M output tokens, resulting in higher operational costs.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Gemini 3.1 Pro operates at $2.0/1M input tokens and $12.0/1M output tokens, offering lower overall expenses.

Claude Opus 4.7 — what sets it apart

  • +Focuses on text and image inputs exclusively.
  • +Designed with a strong emphasis on ethical reasoning and human alignment.

Gemini 3.1 Pro — what sets it apart

  • +Supports multimodal inputs, including audio, file, and video.
  • +Offers a more cost-efficient pricing structure that aids in scaling.

The most consequential difference lies in the broader modality support and cost efficiency of Gemini 3.1 Pro compared to the text-centric design and ethical emphasis of Claude Opus 4.7.

Analysis synthesized from gpt-4o, llama-4-maverick, phi-4, etc.