UABUnbiased AI BenchGlass box for model evals.
Every leaderboard, with receipts.
Home/Versus/Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5
Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5
Live · updated continuously
Model vs model

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5

A debate-ready pair page: current winner, counter-case, decisive benchmarks, and the caveat that should travel with the claim.
Use case · Coding copilot
Winner · Claude Opus 4.7
Evidence mode · Combined public record

Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.

Visible tradeoffs3 shared benchmarks are still tie-heavy, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses the combined public record, with hybrid receipts labeled separately.
Left caseClaude Opus 4.7 wins 9 visible benchmarks · Coding · Vision understanding
Right caseGPT-5.5 wins 6 visible benchmarks · Coding
Traveling caveat3 shared benchmarks are still tie-heavy, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses the combined public record, with hybrid receipts labeled separately.
Debate surface3 shared benchmarks still read as tie-heavy.

Claude Opus 4.7 case

  • Coding
  • Vision understanding

GPT-5.5 case

  • Coding

What changes the outcome

  • Claude Opus 4.7: 22 visible benchmark gaps still leave room for the result to move.
  • GPT-5.5: 25 visible benchmark gaps still leave room for the result to move.

Why this result is surprising

  • 3 shared benchmarks are still tie-heavy, so the headline winner is narrower than it looks.
  • Security is doing a lot of the visible work in the public narrative.

Why this is not a clean win

  • 3 shared benchmarks are still tie-heavy, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses the combined public record, with hybrid receipts labeled separately.
  • GPT-5.5 remains the nearest counter-case once you change preset, mode, or missing-coverage assumptions.
Open full compare workspaceOpen compare artifactOpen controversy artifact
Share this artifact

Publish the claim after the evidence, not before it.

Keep the receipts page and card handy, then use the advanced framings only when you actually need them. Share stays available without becoming the page.

Compare artifactClaude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.

Runner-up: GPT-5.5 · 3 shared benchmarks are still tie-heavy, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses the combined public record, with hybrid receipts labeled separately.

Evidence page/versus/claude-opus-4-7/gpt-5-5?preset=coding-copilot&mode=best-for-this-use-case
Card image/api/og?kind=compare&models=claude-opus-4-7,gpt-5-5&mode=best-for-this-use-case&preset=coding-copilot
Public links

Open or copy the stable surfaces

The receipts page is the canonical evidence surface. The card image is the compact preview for embeds, screenshots, and social cards.

Open evidence pageOpen card preview
Copy-ready text

Use the exact public framing

Each copy action keeps the claim attached to receipts instead of forcing you into a blank composer.

Advanced framings and X composerNeutral, contrarian, open-model, and skeptical variants
Compare artifact

Pick the voice before you post

Use the framing variants only when you need them. The artifact page and the public copy actions above should handle most cases.

Neutral analystLead with the claim, then attach the reason and caveat.Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
ContrarianPush against the easy read and keep the counter-case live.Contrarian take: Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
Open-model angleBias the framing toward the open-weight or transparent-evidence angle.Open-model angle: Compare artifact · Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5
Don't trust the headlineLead with the caveat before you let the claim travel.Don't trust the headline: Compare artifact · Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5
X composer

Compose a post that keeps the caveat attached

The post shell always exposes the headline, why, caveat, receipts link, and an optional reply-bait angle.

HeadlineClaude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
WhyBB · spread 88.9 · %
Caveat3 shared benchmarks are still tie-heavy, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses the combined public record, with hybrid receipts labeled separately.
Receipts link/versus/claude-opus-4-7/gpt-5-5?preset=coding-copilot&mode=best-for-this-use-case
Reply-bait angleIf you still back GPT-5.5, which benchmark or judge weighting should outrank this surface?
PreviewOver 280
Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
BB · spread 88.9 · %
Caveat: 3 shared benchmarks are still tie-heavy, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses the combined public record, with hybrid receipts labeled separately.
Receipts: /versus/claude-opus-4-7/gpt-5-5?preset=coding-copilot&mode=best-for-this-use-case
Reply bait: If you still back GPT-5.5, which benchmark or judge weighting should outrank this surface?
Open in XOpen card preview

Decisive benchmarks

bench
Security

GPT-5.5 has the cleanest edge here.

bench
Debugging

Claude Opus 4.7 has the cleanest edge here.

bench
Terminal-Bench 2.0

GPT-5.5 has the cleanest edge here.

15 of 40 benchmarks
Security
BB · %
Code · Coding
76%0%
85.3%88.9%
88.9% spread
Debugging
BB · %
Code · Coding
86.2%70%
77.5%0%
70% spread
Terminal-Bench 2.0
TERMINAL-BENCH · %
Code · Coding
38%43.5%
82%100%
56.5% spread
BS pushback
BB · %
Text · Professional reasoning
75.5%12.5%
88%50%
37.5% spread
Speed throughput
BB · t/s
Code · Coding
116.4 t/s40%
152.3 t/s60%
20% spread
HiL-Bench
SL · %
Code · Coding
27.7%80%
29.1%100%
20% spread
Code Arena
AR · rating
Code · Coding
1,561100%
1,44781.7%
18.3% spread
WebDev Arena
AR · rating
Code · Coding
1,561100%
1,44781.7%
18.3% spread
Document Arena
AR · rating
Document · Document understanding
1,51194.4%
1,48783.3%
11.1% spread
Intelligence Index
AA · index
Text · Chat / text
5298%
4187.2%
10.8% spread
Speed TTFT
BB · ms
Code · Coding
852.00ms80%
930.00ms70%
10% spread
Time to first token
AA · s
Text · Chat / text
20.83s8.8%
111.36s1.3%
7.5% spread
Vision Arena
AR · rating
Vision · Vision understanding
1,299100%
1,27495%
5% spread
Search Arena
AR · rating
Search · Search / tool use
1,23392.6%
1,23596.3%
3.7% spread
Text Arena
AR · rating
Text · Chat / text
1,47899.1%
1,46197.5%
1.6% spread