UABUnbiased AI BenchAI model rankings with source links.
Every score links back to its source.
Home/Compare
Compare
Live · updated continuously
Compare · pick a model

Compare the models people actually argue about.

Use shared tests, visible gaps, and close-call warnings before turning a benchmark lead into a public claim.
Selected models · 3
Shared benchmarks · 2
Current leader · Claude Opus 4.7
Compare controls

Keep the claim honest.

Use case and source filter stay visible up top. Edits, saves, follows, and links stay available without running the page.

Current frameBest for this use caseCoding copilot · All public sources
What should win?
Preset

Keep the same models, change the use case, and recompute the recommendation without resetting the page.

Sources
Models to compare

Keep the compare set tight. Add one model at a time, then prune aggressively.

3 / 6 models
Workspace utilities

Save, follow, or copy this exact setup only after the comparison looks right.

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Save or share this workspacefollow it, copy it, or reopen it later
Open evidence pageOpen workspaces
Recommendation

Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.

Read this page as a workspace for choosing between top models, not as a universal crown. The current frame is Coding copilot under best for this use case.

Visible tradeoffsThe current evidence supports a shortlist, not a single winner.
Leader for this use caseClaude Opus 4.7
Closest objectionGPT-5.5
Shared tests2 shared benchmarks · 0 close calls
SourcesAll public sources
Why the leader is ahead
Coding · Vision understanding
Where the evidence is thin
0 close-call benchmarks and 22 missing missing leader rows keep this from reading as settled.
What to do next
Inspect decisive benchmarks first, then open the disagreement page or head-to-head pages if the top line still feels too narrow.
Open evidence pageInspect benchmark disagreement
2 of 40 benchmarks
HiL-Bench
SL · %
Code · Coding
27.7%80%
29.1%n/a
20.3%40%
40% spread
Search Arena
AR · rating
Search · Search / tool use
1,237n/a
1,239n/a
1,216n/a
n/a
Decisive benchmarks

What is doing the visible work

HiL-Bench
SL · spread 40.0 · %
Decision pressure

What changes the winner

Claude Opus 4.7
22 visible benchmark gaps still leave room for the result to move.
GPT-5.5
25 visible benchmark gaps still leave room for the result to move.
Gemini 3.1 Pro
33 visible benchmark gaps still leave room for the result to move.
Coverage gaps

Where evidence is missing

Claude Opus 4.7
Missing visible evidence on this compare surface
22
GPT-5.5
Missing visible evidence on this compare surface
25
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Missing visible evidence on this compare surface
33
Preset interpretation

How this weighting reads the field

The current decision mode is grounded in the Coding copilot preset. This keeps the compare page connected to a visible use case instead of an unspoken “overall winner” claim.

score = 1.45 × coding + 1.05 × reasoning math science + 0.80 × long contextcoverage floor = 55% · recency window = 120 days
Claude Opus 4.7
Anthropic
88.8%
GPT-5.5
OpenAI
87.5%
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Google
65.5%
Go deeper

Open the disagreement page that answers your next question

Debate Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5Debate Claude Opus 4.7 vs Gemini 3.1 ProDebate GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Share or publish this compare resultlinks, copy, and advanced framings
Share this evidence page

Post the claim with the evidence attached.

Use the evidence page for the full source trail, or the card image when the post needs a clean preview.

Model compareClaude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.

Runner-up: GPT-5.5 · 0 shared benchmarks are still too close to call, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses all public sources, with provider-official evidence labeled separately.

Evidence page/artifacts/compare?models=claude-opus-4-7,gpt-5-5,gemini-3-1-pro&mode=best-for-this-use-case&preset=coding-copilot
Card image/api/og?kind=compare&models=claude-opus-4-7,gpt-5-5,gemini-3-1-pro&mode=best-for-this-use-case&preset=coding-copilot
Public links

Open or copy the stable surfaces

The evidence page is the canonical source surface. The card image is the compact preview for embeds, screenshots, and social cards.

Open evidence pageOpen card preview
Copy-ready text

Use the exact public framing

Each copy action keeps the claim attached to evidence instead of forcing you into a blank composer.

Advanced framings and X composerNeutral, contrarian, open-model, and skeptical variants
Model compare

Pick the voice before you post

Use the framing variants only when you need them. The evidence page and the public copy actions above should handle most cases.

Neutral analystLead with the claim, then attach the reason and warning.Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
ContrarianPush against the easy read and keep the strongest alternative live.Contrarian take: Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
Open-model angleBias the framing toward the open-weight or transparent-evidence angle.Open-model angle: Model compare · Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
Don't trust the headlineLead with the warning before you let the claim travel.Don't trust the headline: Model compare · Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro
X composer

Compose a post that keeps the warning attached

The post shell always exposes the claim, why, warning, evidence link, and an optional discussion question.

HeadlineClaude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
WhySL · spread 40.0 · %
Warning0 shared benchmarks are still too close to call, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses all public sources, with provider-official evidence labeled separately.
Evidence link/artifacts/compare?models=claude-opus-4-7,gpt-5-5,gemini-3-1-pro&mode=best-for-this-use-case&preset=coding-copilot
Discussion questionIf you still back GPT-5.5, which test should matter more?
PreviewOver 280
Claude Opus 4.7 leads this compare set for coding copilot.
SL · spread 40.0 · %
Warning: 0 shared benchmarks are still too close to call, so the win stays conditional. This compare uses all public sources, with provider-official evidence labeled separately.
Evidence: /artifacts/compare?models=claude-opus-4-7,gpt-5-5,gemini-3-1-pro&mode=best-for-this-use-case&preset=coding-copilot
Question: If you still back GPT-5.5, which test should matter more?
Open in XOpen card preview
Reading guide

How to read this workspace

Who wins most oftenBenchmarks with one clear percentile leader.Missing evidenceBenchmarks where a top model has no visible score.Decision readA public claim tied to an explicit use case and source filter.