Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.7
How Claude Opus 4.8 (Anthropic) and Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) compare on price, context window and best-fit use case.
In short: Claude Opus 4.8 is best for complex coding agents, long-horizon tasks, and workloads needing top reliability and reasoning, while Claude Opus 4.7 suits production coding agents, long-horizon workflow automation, and document or finance agent work. On price it's $5.00 vs $5.00 per 1M input tokens; on context, 1M tokens vs 1M tokens.
Verdict
Claude Opus 4.8 is the more capable pick (Bq score 93 vs 90). Choose Claude Opus 4.7 if its fit is closer to your workload: production coding agents, long-horizon workflow automation, and document or finance agent work.
| Spec | Claude Opus 4.8 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Context window | 1M tokens | 1M tokens |
| Input price /1M | $5.00 | $5.00 |
| Output price /1M | $25.00 | $25.00 |
| Modalities | text, image | text, image |
| Best for | Complex coding agents, long-horizon tasks, and workloads needing top reliability and reasoning. | Production coding agents, long-horizon workflow automation, and document or finance agent work. |
Claude Opus 4.8
- Best-in-class coding and agentic tasks
- Adaptive reasoning with effort controls
- 1M context at flat rate
- Strong instruction following and safety
Claude Opus 4.7
- #1 by coding-agent spend on OpenRouter
- Long-horizon async/agentic reliability
- Strong finance/document agent results
- Multi-session and file-system memory