Claude 4.7 Opus vs GPT-4o mini: pricing & cost comparison
On input tokens, GPT-4o mini is the cheaper of the two — 99% less per million ($15 vs $0.15). On output, GPT-4o mini is 99% cheaper ($75 vs $0.6) — and since output is usually the dominant cost driver, that gap matters more than it looks.
Side by side
| Claude 4.7 Opus | GPT-4o mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $15 | $0.15 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $75 | $0.6 |
| Context window | 200,000 | 128,000 |
| Token-count accuracy | ±2% | exact |
| Cost — 10,000 input + 2,000 output tokens | $0.3 | $0.0027 |
What a real request costs
Take a representative turn — 10,000 input + 2,000 output tokens. Claude 4.7 Opus comes to $0.3, GPT-4o mini to $0.0027. Across 100,000 requests that's a $29730 swing in favour of GPT-4o mini. To run the numbers on your actual prompt, paste it into the calculator and toggle Compare across all models.
Which should you pick?
These are different vendors, so a switch means a different API and a slightly different tokenizer — budget a small calibration buffer. GPT-4o mini give exact counts; the others land within a few percent. See the full breakdown on the dedicated pages for Claude 4.7 Opus and GPT-4o mini.
FAQ
- Is Claude 4.7 Opus or GPT-4o mini cheaper?
- For a typical request (10,000 input + 2,000 output tokens), GPT-4o mini is cheaper — about 99% less, or roughly $29730 saved per 100,000 requests. Claude 4.7 Opus runs $15/$75 per 1M input/output tokens; GPT-4o mini runs $0.15/$0.6.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude 4.7 Opus, at 200,000 tokens versus 128,000.
- How accurate are these token counts?
- Claude 4.7 Opus: Approximated with cl100k_base — drift typically <2% on English and code. GPT-4o mini: Exact tokenization via the canonical OpenAI vocab (o200k_base). The dollar math itself is exact once the token count is known.