Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows or precise instruction following. Pick Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark or claims to outperform flagship models like gpt-6 astra and claude fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) and Fugu Ultra v2.0 (Sakana AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Opus 4.7 is the agentic-coding-focused Opus that traded some long-context recall for long-run reliability. Fugu Ultra v2.0 is sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. The breakdown below works through their capabilities and ideal use cases so you can match one to your task.
Key differences
Context window: both advertise 1M (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: Fugu Ultra v2.0 is the newer model by about 5 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Claude Opus 4.7
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Sakana AI (Global)
Released
April 16, 2026
September 10, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$5/$25 per 1M tokens
$5/$30 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text
SWE-Bench Verified
87.6%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Long-running agentic coding workflows: Claude Opus 4.7 — Claude Opus 4.7 lists long-running agentic coding workflows among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Precise instruction following: Claude Opus 4.7 — Claude Opus 4.7 lists precise instruction following among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Task budgets and effort tiers: Claude Opus 4.7 — Claude Opus 4.7 lists task budgets and effort tiers among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens — and it is the newer of the two.
Claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — Fugu Ultra v2.0 lists claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them among its strengths; Claude Opus 4.7 does not.
1M-token context window: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — Claude Opus 4.7 is comparatively weak here — long-context recall regressed vs 4.6
Which should you pick?
Anyone whose priority is long-running agentic coding workflows: Claude Opus 4.7 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — That is its strongest area.
Claude Opus 4.7: where it fits
The agentic-coding-focused Opus that traded some long-context recall for long-run reliability. Released April 16, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for long-running agentic coding workflows, precise instruction following, task budgets and effort tiers, and large-codebase operation.
Its trade-offs are real: long-context recall regressed vs 4.6, and superseded by Opus 4.8. At $5 in / $25 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Fugu Ultra v2.0: where it fits
Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark, claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them, and 1M-token context window.
Its trade-offs: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that dynamically routes tasks across a pool of other models, so head-to-head benchmark framing against monolithic frontier models should be read skeptically, pricing rises to roughly $10/$45 per million tokens for prompts above 272K tokens, and benchmark comparisons against GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 are Sakana's own self-reported figures, not independently verified head-to-head scores. At $5 in / $30 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 4.7 and Fugu Ultra v2.0 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows, Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Fugu Ultra v2.0 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Fugu Ultra v2.0, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 4.7 leans toward long-running agentic coding workflows while Fugu Ultra v2.0 leans toward sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Fugu Ultra v2.0?
They are priced almost identically, so cost will not decide between them.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Opus 4.7 and Fugu Ultra v2.0 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 4.7, Fugu Ultra v2.0 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Opus 4.7 or Fugu Ultra v2.0?
Fugu Ultra v2.0 — released September 10, 2026, about 5 months after Claude Opus 4.7.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Fugu Ultra v2.0
Anthropic · US | Sakana AI · Global · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows or precise instruction following. Pick Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark or claims to outperform flagship models like gpt-6 astra and claude fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) and Fugu Ultra v2.0 (Sakana AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Opus 4.7 is the agentic-coding-focused Opus that traded some long-context recall for long-run reliability. Fugu Ultra v2.0 is sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. The breakdown below works through their capabilities and ideal use cases so you can match one to your task.
Key differences at a glance
▸Context window: both advertise 1M (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: Fugu Ultra v2.0 is the newer model by about 5 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Claude Opus 4.7
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Sakana AI (Global)
Released
April 16, 2026
September 10, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$5/$25 per 1M tokens
$5/$30 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text
SWE-Bench Verified
87.6%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Long-running agentic coding workflows
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 lists long-running agentic coding workflows among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Precise instruction following
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 lists precise instruction following among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Task budgets and effort tiers
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 lists task budgets and effort tiers among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens — and it is the newer of the two.
Claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Fugu Ultra v2.0 lists claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them among its strengths; Claude Opus 4.7 does not.
1M-token context window
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Claude Opus 4.7 is comparatively weak here — long-context recall regressed vs 4.6
Which should you pick?
Anyone whose priority is long-running agentic coding workflows
→ Claude Opus 4.7
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark
→ Fugu Ultra v2.0
That is its strongest area.
Claude Opus 4.7: where it fits
The agentic-coding-focused Opus that traded some long-context recall for long-run reliability. Released April 16, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for long-running agentic coding workflows, precise instruction following, task budgets and effort tiers, and large-codebase operation.
Its trade-offs are real: long-context recall regressed vs 4.6, and superseded by Opus 4.8. At $5 in / $25 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Fugu Ultra v2.0: where it fits
Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark, claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them, and 1M-token context window.
Its trade-offs: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that dynamically routes tasks across a pool of other models, so head-to-head benchmark framing against monolithic frontier models should be read skeptically, pricing rises to roughly $10/$45 per million tokens for prompts above 272K tokens, and benchmark comparisons against GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 are Sakana's own self-reported figures, not independently verified head-to-head scores. At $5 in / $30 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 4.7 and Fugu Ultra v2.0 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows, Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Opus 4.7 and Fugu Ultra v2.0 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Fugu Ultra v2.0 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Fugu Ultra v2.0, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 4.7 leans toward long-running agentic coding workflows while Fugu Ultra v2.0 leans toward sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Fugu Ultra v2.0?
They are priced almost identically, so cost will not decide between them.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Opus 4.7 and Fugu Ultra v2.0 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 4.7, Fugu Ultra v2.0 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Opus 4.7 or Fugu Ultra v2.0?
Fugu Ultra v2.0 — released September 10, 2026, about 5 months after Claude Opus 4.7.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.