Side-by-side comparison
o1 vs Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast)
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast)
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$30.0000
Output / 1M
$150.0000
| o1 | Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Anthropic |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 200,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | vision, tools, json_mode | vision, tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 15.0000 | 30.0000 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 60.0000 | 150.0000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, o1 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast)?
o1 is cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast) on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $52.5 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, o1 or Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast)?
Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast) has the larger context window at 1M tokens versus 200k tokens for o1. That means Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast) can ingest about 5.0x as much text per request.
What is the difference between o1 and Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast)?
o1 comes from OpenAI; Claude Opus 4.7 (Fast) comes from Anthropic. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.