Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.7: cost compared

Last verified

Claude Opus 4.7 is 0% cheaper on input and 0% cheaper on output than Claude Opus 4.8. Whether that makes it the right choice depends entirely on whether it does your task well enough — this page gives you the cost side of that trade, precisely.

Rates side by side

$ per million tokensClaude Opus 4.8Claude Opus 4.7
Input$5.00$5.00
Output$25.00$25.00
Cached input$0.50$0.50
Batch input$2.50$2.50
Output : input ratio5.0×5.0×

What the difference is worth

Monthly cost for the same workload on each, without caching:

WorkloadClaude Opus 4.8Claude Opus 4.7Difference
Support chatbot
1,000 conversations/month · 2,000 in + 500 out each
$22.50$22.50$0.0000 saved
RAG search
10,000 queries/month · 8,000 in + 400 out each
$500$500$0.0000 saved
Bulk extraction
10,000 documents · 3,000 in + 300 out each
$225$225$0.0000 saved
Coding agent
100 runs/month · 400,000 in + 20,000 out each
$250$250$0.0000 saved

Which to use

Claude Opus 4.7 if the task is well-specified and mechanical — extraction, classification, formatting, routine transformation. The saving is real and compounds with volume.

Claude Opus 4.8 if the task involves genuine reasoning, long-horizon planning, or work where a wrong answer is expensive to catch. Paying 1.0× more on input is trivial compared to the cost of shipping a bad result.

Both are Anthropic models, so switching is usually a one-line change and the tokenizer is the same — which makes this a genuinely easy experiment to run. Test on your own workload before deciding.

Don't skip caching

Cached input costs $0.50 on Claude Opus 4.8 and $0.50 on Claude Opus 4.7. If your prompts share a stable prefix, caching on the more expensive model can beat switching to the cheaper one outright — worth checking before you migrate anything.

Sources

Anthropic rates verified 2026-08-05 (source). Anthropic rates verified 2026-08-05 (source).