Compare Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) and Google: Gemini 2.5 Flash (Google) by price, context, capabilities, and latency.
Cote a cote
Comparez le prix, le fournisseur, le contexte, les capacites, la latence et la base de source.
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Capabilities | Best for | Latency | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7anthropic/claude-opus-4.7 | Anthropic | $5 / 1M tokens | $25 / 1M tokens | 1M | Tool callingJSON modeLong contextReasoning | frontier reasoning, large codebase review | 2300-6800ms | Catalog | OpenRouter if available |
| Google: Gemini 2.5 Flashgoogle/gemini-2.5-flash | $0.3 / 1M tokens | $2.50 / 1M tokens | 1M | Tool callingVisionJSON modeLong context | long-document summarization, image Q&A | 900-2800ms | Catalog | OpenRouter if available |
FAQ
Google: Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper ($0.3 / 1M tokens input / $2.50 / 1M tokens output) vs Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7 ($5 / 1M tokens input / $25 / 1M tokens output). Actual cost depends on your input/output token mix — estimate it with the pricing calculator.
Google: Gemini 2.5 Flash is larger (1M tokens) vs 1M tokens.
Both target Long context. Pick Google: Gemini 2.5 Flash to optimize cost, or Google: Gemini 2.5 Flash for the longer context window. Test both on real prompts before committing production traffic.
Comparaisons liees