Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.1
Claude Opus 4.7 
Grok 4.1 Verdict
- Claude Opus 4.7 leads on quality: 64.1 vs 57.4.
- Claude Opus 4.7 is stronger in coding, composite, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
- Grok 4.1 (thinking) is stronger in agents & tools.
- Grok 4.1 (thinking) is 6.4× cheaper ($1.56 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.7 | Grok 4.1 (thinking) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 64.1 | 57.4 |
| Agents & tools score | 68.4 | 78.3 |
| Coding score | 64.7 | 47.5 |
| Composite score | 73.6 | – |
| Human preference score | 69.0 | 66.4 |
| Instruction following score | 55.4 | – |
| Knowledge score | 65.6 | 57.2 |
| Long context score | 63.3 | – |
| Maths score | 65.4 | 48.3 |
| Multimodal score | 65.1 | 53.2 |
| Reasoning score | 66.5 | 58.9 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $1.56 |
| Output speed | 49 tok/s | – |
| Time to first answer | 16.4 s | – |
| Context window | 1M | 2M |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | – |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | 56.0% |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | – |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | – |
| ProofBench | – | 4.0% |
| GSO-Bench | 44.1% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.3 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1494 | 1465 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1519 | 1477 |
| LMArena Coding | 1547 | 1499 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1557 | 1240 |
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | 1199 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 40.7 | – |
| IFBench | 58.6% | – |
| AA-LCR | 78.7% | – |
| MMMU-Pro | 78.8% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | 27.3 | – |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 51.5% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 91.4% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 42.3% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 88.6% | – |
| AIME (Vals) | 96.3% | 91.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | 85.1% | 80.6% |
| MMLU-Pro | 89.9% | 84.2% |
| LegalBench | 85.3% | 82.5% |
| CorpFin | 66.1% | 66.0% |
| TaxEval | 75.3% | 73.1% |
| MedQA | – | 92.1% |
| MGSM | – | 89.5% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 68.5% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 82.0% | 41.4% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 90.2% | 84.3% |
| Vals Index | 56.1 | – |
| AIME 2026 | – | 94.2% |
| HMMT February 2026 | – | 86.4% |
| MathArena Apex | – | 5.2% |
| HiL-Bench | 41.7% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | – |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 73.3% | – |
| BFCL Overall | – | 69.6% |
Data as of 2026-09-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.1: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Grok 4.1?
- Claude Opus 4.7 leads on quality: 64.1 vs 57.4. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 4.7 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Grok 4.1 for coding?
- Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in coding (65 vs 48 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Grok 4.1 for agentic tasks?
- Grok 4.1 scores higher in agentic tasks (78 vs 68 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Grok 4.1?
- Grok 4.1 is cheaper: $1.56 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Grok 4.1 accepts more context: 2M against 1M tokens.