Model Comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
vs. Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Anthropic, Korea Telecom
Recommended Pick
An Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) 8 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Coding, GPQA
Lowest Price
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview
59.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
53.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort).
Reasoning gap
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview leads Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) by 5.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) leads Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview by 41.2 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) wins 8 measurable categories, including Throughput, Coding, GPQA, HLE.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview
Korea Telecom
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick An Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) | Ko Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $5.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $25.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $10.00/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | Korea Telecom |
| Release Date | Apr 16, 2026 | Dec 11, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 43.7 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 1004ms | — |
| Latency | 1004ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 54.1 | 59.6 |
| Intelligence | 42.7 | — |
| Coding | 53.1 | 11.9 |
| Math | — | 78.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 88.5% | 72.2% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 81.3% |
| HLE | 31.2% | 8.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 57.6% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 78.7% |
| SciCode | 50.1% | 29.7% |
| LCR | 67.0% | 11.0% |
| IFBench | 43.6% | 45.6% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 74.0% | 49.4% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 54.5% | 3.0% |
Key Takeaways
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview has the strongest reasoning profile with a 59.6 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) reaches a 53.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
- Code generation
- Software development
Mi:dm K 2.5 Pro Preview
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
