Compare / Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.2

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.2

22 results from 5 sources that measured both models. Each row is in the source's own units; there is no overall winner.

Claude Opus 4.7
Anthropic · profile
GPT-5.2
OpenAI · profile
Results compared
22
Shared sources
5
BenchmarkMetricClaude Opus 4.7GPT-5.2
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,4941,425
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,2121,162
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,4771,442
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedBusiness, management and financeArena rating 1,5081,444
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedCreative writingArena rating 1,4881,391
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedExpert promptsArena rating 1,5351,475
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedInstruction followingArena rating 1,5031,427
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,5021,437
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedWriting, literature and languageArena rating 1,4961,411
OpenHands IndexreportedAverage% resolved 69.7%58.8%
OpenHands IndexreportedFront end (SWE-Bench Multimodal)% resolved 48.5%30.9%
OpenHands IndexreportedGreenfield (Commit0)% resolved 56.2%50.0%
OpenHands IndexreportedInformation gathering (GAIA)% resolved 81.2%65.5%
OpenHands IndexreportedIssue resolution (SWE-Bench)% resolved 81.6%74.6%
OpenHands IndexreportedTesting (SWT-Bench)% resolved 80.8%73.2%
tau2-benchreportedConsistency (pass^4)% of tasks 24.7%18.6%
tau2-benchreportedTask success (pass^1)% of tasks 40.2%32.2%
UGI LeaderboardreportedRequested-length error% off the requested word count 1.0%76.0%
UGI LeaderboardreportedStyle adherencescore from 0 to 1 0.410.40
UGI LeaderboardreportedWriting scorescore out of 100 61.449.4
Vectara Hallucination LeaderboardreportedAnswer rate% of documents 98.0%100.0%
Vectara Hallucination LeaderboardreportedHallucination rate% of summaries 12.0%8.4%

Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.