Claude Opus 4.7 vs Bonsai Image Binary 4B
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic |  Bonsai Image Binary 4BPrismML |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #11 of 4679.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #37 of 44$0.286 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #20 of 3852.7 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $5.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | Not reported |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $25.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | Not reported |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | Not reported |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 18, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Opus 4.7 | Bonsai Image Binary 4B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | PrismML |
| Family | Claude 4 | Bonsai Image 4b |
| Model | Claude Opus 4.7 | Bonsai Image Binary 4B |
| Version | Claude Opus 4.7 | Bonsai Image Binary 4B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-04-16 | 2026-05-18 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-01-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Image |
| Context window | 1,000K | Unknown |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 4B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | No |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard) | Unknown |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | generation |
| Base model | Unknown | FLUX.2 Klein 4B |
| Default resolution | Unknown | 512 × 512 |
| Transformer size | Unknown | 0.93 GB |
| Weight format | Unknown | Binary weights with FP16 group scales |
Claude Opus 4.7 Capabilities
Bonsai Image Binary 4B Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Bonsai Image Binary 4B FAQs
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.7 and Bonsai Image Binary 4B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B?+
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a directly sourced input price: $5.00 per million tokens. Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a directly sourced output price: $25.00 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Claude Opus 4.7 is 1,000K and Bonsai Image Binary 4B is —.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B be self-hosted?+
Bonsai Image Binary 4B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 4.7 is not marked open weight; Bonsai Image Binary 4B is open weight.
Can Claude Opus 4.7 and Bonsai Image Binary 4B understand images?+
Claude Opus 4.7 is documented with image input; Bonsai Image Binary 4B is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 4.7 is 128K and Bonsai Image Binary 4B is —.
Do Claude Opus 4.7 and Bonsai Image Binary 4B support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Opus 4.7: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Bonsai Image Binary 4B: none of these features are definitively sourced. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B?+
Claude Opus 4.7 has 2 sourced provider routes; Bonsai Image Binary 4B has 0, so Claude Opus 4.7 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.7 or Bonsai Image Binary 4B?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.