Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic 1000000
💰 Total Cost Calculation (from Plugin)
Output: $0.012500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Output: $0.012500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
Unit: $0.000000
Fees: $0.000000
Advanced Cost Breakdown (from Plugin)
Detailed Cost Analysis (from Plugin)
For 500,000 input tokens and 2,000 output tokens:
- Input Cost: $0.625000 (rounded ~ $0.63)
- Output Cost: $0.012500 (rounded ~ $0.01)
- Total Cost: $0.356250 (rounded ~ $0.36)
- Cost per 1K tokens: $0.000710
- Tokens per dollar: 1,409,123 tokens
- Context Window: 1000000 tokens
Speed & Performance Analysis
With a processing speed of 260 tokens per second and 400ms time to first token:
- Processing Time: 32 minutes, 49.56 seconds
- Latency: 400 milliseconds to first token
- Base Throughput: 260 tokens/second
- Effective Throughput: 255 tokens/second (temperature-adjusted)
Best Use Cases
Want this applied to YOUR actual stack?
This calculator shows the math for Claude Opus 4.7. Your decision needs more — current infrastructure, compliance requirements, actual workload patterns, volume tiers — that change which model is right for you.
Get a $39 personalized AI Architecture Audit. PDF tailored to your stack, delivered in under 60 seconds. 7-day no-questions-asked refund.
Get my instant AI audit — $39 →Gemini 3.1 Pro Google 1000000
💰 Total Cost Calculation (from Plugin)
Output: $0.018000 (rounded ~ $0.02)
Output: $0.018000 (rounded ~ $0.02)
Unit: $0.000000
Fees: $0.000000
Advanced Cost Breakdown (from Plugin)
Detailed Cost Analysis (from Plugin)
For 500,000 input tokens and 2,000 output tokens:
- Input Cost: $1.000000
- Output Cost: $0.018000 (rounded ~ $0.02)
- Total Cost: $0.568000 (rounded ~ $0.57)
- Cost per 1K tokens: $0.001131
- Tokens per dollar: 883,803 tokens
- Context Window: 1000000 tokens
Speed & Performance Analysis
With a processing speed of 400 tokens per second and 220ms time to first token:
- Processing Time: 21 minutes, 20.28 seconds
- Latency: 220 milliseconds to first token
- Base Throughput: 400 tokens/second
- Effective Throughput: 392 tokens/second (temperature-adjusted)
Best Use Cases
Want this applied to YOUR actual stack?
This calculator shows the math for Gemini 3.1 Pro. Your decision needs more — current infrastructure, compliance requirements, actual workload patterns, volume tiers — that change which model is right for you.
Get a $39 personalized AI Architecture Audit. PDF tailored to your stack, delivered in under 60 seconds. 7-day no-questions-asked refund.
Get my instant AI audit — $39 →✨ Market Recommendations AI Model Registry
← Back to Claude Opus 4.7| Rank | AI Model & Provider | Total Cost | vs Claude Opus 4.7 | vs Gemini 3.1 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏆 |
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Google
|
$0.017938 (rounded ~ $0.02) Best Value | ↓ 95% cheaper | ↓ 96.8% cheaper |
| 🥈 |
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Google
|
$0.021875 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 93.9% cheaper | ↓ 96.1% cheaper |
| 🥉 |
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Google
|
$0.021875 (rounded ~ $0.02) | ↓ 93.9% cheaper | ↓ 96.1% cheaper |
| #4 |
GPT-5.6 Luna
OpenAI
|
$0.071750 (rounded ~ $0.07) | ↓ 79.9% cheaper | ↓ 87.4% cheaper |
| #5 |
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Google
|
$0.106875 (rounded ~ $0.11) | ↓ 70% cheaper | ↓ 81.2% cheaper |
| #6 |
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Google
|
$0.107625 (rounded ~ $0.11) | ↓ 69.8% cheaper | ↓ 81.1% cheaper |
| #7 |
Claude Sonnet 5
Anthropic
|
$0.142500 (rounded ~ $0.14) | ↓ 60% cheaper | ↓ 74.9% cheaper |
| #8 |
Gemini 3.1 Flash
Google
|
$0.143500 (rounded ~ $0.14) | ↓ 59.7% cheaper | ↓ 74.7% cheaper |
| #9 |
GPT-5.6 Terra
OpenAI
|
$0.179375 | ↓ 49.6% cheaper | ↓ 68.4% cheaper |
| #10 |
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Anthropic
|
$0.213750 (rounded ~ $0.21) | ↓ 40% cheaper | ↓ 62.4% cheaper |
| #11 |
Claude Opus 5
Anthropic
|
$0.356250 (rounded ~ $0.36) | Same price | ↓ 37.3% cheaper |
| #12 |
Claude Opus 4.8
Anthropic
|
$0.356250 (rounded ~ $0.36) | Same price | ↓ 37.3% cheaper |
| #13 |
Claude Opus 4.6
Anthropic
|
$0.356250 (rounded ~ $0.36) | Same price | ↓ 37.3% cheaper |
| #14 |
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Google
|
$0.358750 (rounded ~ $0.36) | ↑ 0.7% more | ↓ 36.8% cheaper |
| #15 |
GPT-5.6 Sol
OpenAI
|
$0.358750 (rounded ~ $0.36) | ↑ 0.7% more | ↓ 36.8% cheaper |
| #16 |
Grok 4.3
xAI
|
$0.558000 (rounded ~ $0.56) | ↑ 56.6% more | ↓ 1.8% cheaper |
| #17 |
Grok 4.20 Beta
xAI
|
$0.558000 (rounded ~ $0.56) | ↑ 56.6% more | ↓ 1.8% cheaper |
| #18 |
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Google
|
$0.568000 (rounded ~ $0.57) | ↑ 59.4% more | Same price |
| #19 |
GPT-5.4
OpenAI
|
$0.710000 | ↑ 99.3% more | ↑ 25% more |
| #20 |
GPT-5.4 Thinking
OpenAI
|
$0.710000 | ↑ 99.3% more | ↑ 25% more |
| #21 |
Claude Fable 5
Anthropic
|
$0.712500 (rounded ~ $0.71) | ↑ 100% more | ↑ 25.4% more |
| #22 |
Claude Mythos 5
Anthropic
|
$0.712500 (rounded ~ $0.71) | ↑ 100% more | ↑ 25.4% more |
| #23 |
GPT-5.5
OpenAI
|
$1.420000 | ↑ 298.6% more | ↑ 150% more |
| #24 |
GPT-5.5
OpenAI
|
$1.420000 | ↑ 298.6% more | ↑ 150% more |
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Google
Gemini 2.5 Flash Google
GPT-5.6 Luna OpenAI
Gemini 3.6 Flash Google
Gemini 3.5 Flash Google
Claude Sonnet 5 Anthropic
Gemini 3.1 Flash Google
GPT-5.6 Terra OpenAI
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Anthropic
Claude Opus 5 Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic
Gemini 2.5 Pro Google
GPT-5.6 Sol OpenAI
Grok 4.3 xAI
Grok 4.20 Beta xAI
Gemini 3.1 Pro Google
GPT-5.4 OpenAI
GPT-5.4 Thinking OpenAI
Claude Fable 5 Anthropic
Claude Mythos 5 Anthropic
GPT-5.5 OpenAI
GPT-5.5 OpenAI
Choosing the Right Engine for Legal Analysis
In the context of game studio legal workflows—where you are juggling IP licensing agreements, NDAs, and contractor terms—the choice between Claude Opus 4.7 and Gemini 3.1 Pro often comes down to the specific nature of your review task. Both models excel at handling long-form document ingestion, but their underlying strengths differ significantly.
Claude Opus 4.7 has established a reputation for high-fidelity reasoning and robust instruction following. When your legal review involves multi-step logical verification, such as ensuring a clause from an old licensing agreement doesn’t conflict with a new distribution deal, Opus 4.7’s structured thinking process tends to produce more reliable, nuance-aware outputs. It is particularly adept at maintaining strict guardrails throughout a complex document review.
Conversely, Gemini 3.1 Pro is often the superior choice for high-throughput, multimodal ingestion. If your legal pipeline requires parsing diverse document types—such as scanned PDFs, handwritten annotations, or complex charts within contracts—Gemini’s native multimodal architecture is highly effective. It offers significant advantages for teams that prioritize scale, large-context retrieval, and performance across varied file formats. While Opus 4.7 captures the subtle logical traps in a contract, Gemini 3.1 Pro excels at the rapid, broad-spectrum analysis needed for high-volume document triage. For a AAA game studio balancing developer productivity with legal due diligence, the decision hinges on whether your priority is pinpoint accuracy on single documents or rapid intake across your entire portfolio.