Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows or precise instruction following. Pick GPT-6 Astra for computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%) or cybersecurity exploit development (exploitbench 100%). On a tight budget at scale, Claude Opus 4.7 is the value pick.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) and GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI) 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. GPT-6 Astra is openAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Claude Opus 4.7 is about 2× cheaper on input ($5/$25 per 1M tokens vs $10/$50 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
Context window: 1M vs 1.05M tokens — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: GPT-6 Astra is the newer model by about 5 months (released September 3, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Claude Opus 4.7
GPT-6 Astra
Provider
Anthropic (US)
OpenAI (US)
Released
April 16, 2026
September 3, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
1.05M tokens (~1,575 pages)
Price (in/out)
$5/$25 per 1M tokens
$10/$50 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image
SWE-Bench Verified
87.6%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
96.3%
Who wins what
Long-running agentic coding workflows: Claude Opus 4.7 — GPT-6 Astra is comparatively weak here — trails Meta's Muse Spark 1.3 on some coding evals (DeepSWE v1.1: 74.1 vs 75.4)
Precise instruction following: Claude Opus 4.7 — The agentic-coding-focused Opus that traded some long-context recall for long-run reliability — and it runs cheaper at $5/$25 per 1M tokens.
Task budgets and effort tiers: Claude Opus 4.7 — At $5/$25 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra ($10/$50 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%): GPT-6 Astra — OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks — and it is the newer of the two.
Cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%): GPT-6 Astra — GPT-6 Astra lists cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%) among its strengths; Claude Opus 4.7 does not.
Frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%): GPT-6 Astra — GPT-6 Astra lists frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%) among its strengths; Claude Opus 4.7 does not.
Lowest cost at scale: Claude Opus 4.7 — At $5/$25 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Claude Opus 4.7 — At $5/$25 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: GPT-6 Astra — Larger 1.05M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is long-running agentic coding workflows: Claude Opus 4.7 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%): GPT-6 Astra — 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.
GPT-6 Astra: where it fits
OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. Released September 3, 2026 by OpenAI, it is built for computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%), cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%), frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%), and long-context recall (MRCR v2 512K-1M: 96.3%).
Its trade-offs: no native audio or video input, pricing doubles for prompts over 272K tokens (input/cache 2x, output 1.5x), trails Meta's Muse Spark 1.3 on some coding evals (DeepSWE v1.1: 74.1 vs 75.4), and a separate opt-in "Daybreak" program gives vetted cybersecurity defenders a less-restricted version for legitimate vulnerability research; the public version already refuses ~91.5% of offensive cyber jailbreak attempts by default. At $10 in / $50 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-6 Astra overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Claude Opus 4.7 costs less per token; GPT-6 Astra holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows, GPT-6 Astra for computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%). 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 GPT-6 Astra better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for GPT-6 Astra, 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 GPT-6 Astra leans toward computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-6 Astra?
Claude Opus 4.7 is cheaper — $5/$25 per 1M tokens vs $10/$50 per 1M tokens, roughly 2× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 1M vs 1.05M tokens is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-6 Astra together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 4.7, GPT-6 Astra 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 GPT-6 Astra?
GPT-6 Astra — released September 3, 2026, about 5 months after Claude Opus 4.7.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-6 Astra
Anthropic · US | OpenAI · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows or precise instruction following. Pick GPT-6 Astra for computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%) or cybersecurity exploit development (exploitbench 100%). On a tight budget at scale, Claude Opus 4.7 is the value pick.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) and GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI) 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. GPT-6 Astra is openAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Claude Opus 4.7 is about 2× cheaper on input ($5/$25 per 1M tokens vs $10/$50 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
▸Context window: 1M vs 1.05M tokens — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: GPT-6 Astra is the newer model by about 5 months (released September 3, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Claude Opus 4.7
GPT-6 Astra
Provider
Anthropic (US)
OpenAI (US)
Released
April 16, 2026
September 3, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
1.05M tokens (~1,575 pages)
Price (in/out)
$5/$25 per 1M tokens
$10/$50 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image
SWE-Bench Verified
87.6%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
96.3%
Who wins what
Long-running agentic coding workflows
Claude Opus 4.7
GPT-6 Astra is comparatively weak here — trails Meta's Muse Spark 1.3 on some coding evals (DeepSWE v1.1: 74.1 vs 75.4)
Precise instruction following
Claude Opus 4.7
The agentic-coding-focused Opus that traded some long-context recall for long-run reliability — and it runs cheaper at $5/$25 per 1M tokens.
Task budgets and effort tiers
Claude Opus 4.7
At $5/$25 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra ($10/$50 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%)
GPT-6 Astra
OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks — and it is the newer of the two.
Cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%)
GPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra lists cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%) among its strengths; Claude Opus 4.7 does not.
Frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%)
GPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra lists frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%) among its strengths; Claude Opus 4.7 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Claude Opus 4.7
At $5/$25 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Claude Opus 4.7
At $5/$25 per 1M tokens it undercuts GPT-6 Astra, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ GPT-6 Astra
Larger 1.05M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is long-running agentic coding workflows
→ Claude Opus 4.7
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%)
→ GPT-6 Astra
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.
GPT-6 Astra: where it fits
OpenAI's flagship reasoning model for computer use, browsing, coding and science, released September 3, 2026 with near-perfect scores on FrontierMath, ExploitBench and long-context recall benchmarks. Released September 3, 2026 by OpenAI, it is built for computer & browser use (ScreenSpot-Pro 92.7%), cybersecurity exploit development (ExploitBench 100%), frontier math reasoning (FrontierMath Tier 4: 97.6%), and long-context recall (MRCR v2 512K-1M: 96.3%).
Its trade-offs: no native audio or video input, pricing doubles for prompts over 272K tokens (input/cache 2x, output 1.5x), trails Meta's Muse Spark 1.3 on some coding evals (DeepSWE v1.1: 74.1 vs 75.4), and a separate opt-in "Daybreak" program gives vetted cybersecurity defenders a less-restricted version for legitimate vulnerability research; the public version already refuses ~91.5% of offensive cyber jailbreak attempts by default. At $10 in / $50 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-6 Astra overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Claude Opus 4.7 costs less per token; GPT-6 Astra holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 4.7 for long-running agentic coding workflows, GPT-6 Astra for computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-6 Astra 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 GPT-6 Astra better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for GPT-6 Astra, 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 GPT-6 Astra leans toward computer & browser use (screenspot-pro 92.7%), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-6 Astra?
Claude Opus 4.7 is cheaper — $5/$25 per 1M tokens vs $10/$50 per 1M tokens, roughly 2× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 1M vs 1.05M tokens is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-6 Astra together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 4.7, GPT-6 Astra 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 GPT-6 Astra?
GPT-6 Astra — released September 3, 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.