BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases7

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.7

Full profiles: Claude Opus 4.7 (Anthropic) and Grok 4.7 (SpaceXAI): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 15 sources

As of 6 Nov 2026, Claude Opus 4.7 is ahead of Grok 4.7 on quality (63.1 vs 58.3 on the BenchLeader Index), but Grok 4.7 is 3.3× cheaper at $3.00 vs $10.00 per 1M tokens blended. Claude Opus 4.7 leads in every category we measure both in. Grok 4.7 streams ~1.5× faster.

Key facts (as of 6 Nov 2026)

  • Claude Opus 4.7 scores 63.1 on the BenchLeader Index and Grok 4.7 scores 58.3 (BenchLeader, 6 Nov 2026).
  • Claude Opus 4.7 costs $10.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 6 Nov 2026).
  • Grok 4.7 costs $3.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 6 Nov 2026).
  • Grok 4.7 streams ~1.5× faster than Claude Opus 4.7 (Artificial Analysis, 7-day median, 6 Nov 2026).
  • Of the 23 benchmarks both models have, Grok 4.7 leads 12 (BenchLeader, 6 Nov 2026).
  • On Arena WebDev, Claude Opus 4.7 is rated 1555 and Grok 4.7 1638 (LMArena, as published by 6 Nov 2026).
Claude Opus 4.7 benchmarks Anthropic Grok 4.7 benchmarks xhigh SpaceXAIAdd a third model

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingEither61 vs 62 category score; Arena WebDev 1555 vs 1638Either
Agents & tool useClaude Opus 4.765 vs 57 category score; Terminal-Bench 80.2% vs 37.6%High
MathsClaude Opus 4.767 vs 56 category score; Arena Maths 1491 vs 1443High
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.765 vs 56 category score; Arena Hard Prompts 1519 vs 1463High
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.762 vs 61 category score; LegalBench 85.3% vs 84.4%Medium
Images and other mediaClaude Opus 4.767 vs 56 category score; Arena Vision 1317 vs 1231High
Chat quality (human preference)Claude Opus 4.767 vs 62 on Arena votesMedium
Lowest costGrok 4.7$3.00 vs $10.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.144 vs $0.400–
Fastest first answerClaude Opus 4.71.0 s (Claude Opus 4.7) vs 55.1 s (Grok 4.7 (xhigh)) to the first answer token–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Claude Opus 4.7 leads on quality: 63.1 vs 58.3.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 is stronger in agents & tools, human preference, knowledge, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh) is stronger in coding, long context.
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh) is 3.3× cheaper ($3.00 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh) streams 1.5× faster (71 vs 48 tokens per second).

At a glance

SpecClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.7
DeveloperAnthropicSpaceXAI
Released16 Apr 202621 Sep 2026
Context window (tokens)1,000,000500,000
Compared atClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.7 (xhigh)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$5.00 / $25.00 / $0.500$2.00 / $6.00 / $0.500

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.7 (xhigh)Leader
Reasoning64.956.4Claude Opus 4.7
Coding61.361.5level
Agents & tools65.356.9Claude Opus 4.7
Maths66.655.9Claude Opus 4.7
Knowledge62.261.1Claude Opus 4.7
Human preference67.362.3Claude Opus 4.7
Multimodal66.855.7Claude Opus 4.7
Long context–63.1not comparable

On one chart

Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.

2550 avg75ReasoningCodingAgents & toolsMathsKnowledgeMultimodalHumanpreferenceClaude Opus 4.7, Reasoning: 64.9Claude Opus 4.7, Coding: 61.3Claude Opus 4.7, Agents & tools: 65.3Claude Opus 4.7, Maths: 66.6Claude Opus 4.7, Knowledge: 62.2Claude Opus 4.7, Multimodal: 66.8Claude Opus 4.7, Human preference: 67.3Grok 4.7, Reasoning: 56.4Grok 4.7, Coding: 61.5Grok 4.7, Agents & tools: 56.9Grok 4.7, Maths: 55.9Grok 4.7, Knowledge: 61.1Grok 4.7, Multimodal: 55.7Grok 4.7, Human preference: 62.3

Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Instruction following, Long context.

ModelIndex

Where sources disagree

Across the 23 benchmarks both have, Claude Opus 4.7 leads 11, Grok 4.7 leads 12. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Opus 4.7 ahead.

Overall indexClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.7 (xhigh)Leader
BenchLeader Index63.158.3Claude Opus 4.7
Arena Text14941441Claude Opus 4.7

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.

MeasureClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.7 (xhigh)
Blended price per 1M tokens$10.00$3.00
Input / output per 1M$5.00 / $25.00$2.00 / $6.00
Cached input per 1M$0.500$0.500
Price per task: chat reply$0.0095$0.0026
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.075$0.028
Price per task: code edit$0.068$0.021
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.400$0.144
Price per task: structured extraction$0.015$0.0052
Agentic coding session, input mostly cached$0.198$0.076
Cost per benchmark task (AA Index)–$7.77
Output tokens per task (AA Index)–105k
Of which reasoning–69k
Time per task (AA Index)–24 min
Output speed48 tok/s71 tok/s
Time to first answer1.0 s55.1 s
Time to a complete answer–147.2 s

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 63.1 and takes 1 s to its first answer token; Claude Opus 4.7 (high) scores 60.9 in 1 s, Claude Opus 4.7 (max) scores 59.5 in 45 s. Grok 4.7 (xhigh) scores 58.3 and takes 55 s to its first answer token; Grok 4.7 (high) scores 57.7 in 31 s, Grok 4.7 (low) scores 56.0 in 9 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

164 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.7 (xhigh)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader63.158.3
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader65.356.9
Coding scoreBenchLeader61.361.5
Human preference scoreBenchLeader67.362.3
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader62.261.1
Maths scoreBenchLeader66.655.9
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader66.855.7
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader64.956.4
Long context scoreBenchLeader–63.1
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$10.00$3.00
Output speedBenchLeader48 tok/s71 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader1.0 s55.1 s
Context windowBenchLeader1,000,000 tokens500,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub86.4%†92.7%
Humanity's Last ExamScale AI / CAIS36.2%–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench61.7%–
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)15191463
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench–82.7%†
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench87.2%†82.7%
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis91.4%†–
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis42.3%†43.1%
HLE-Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis–23.2%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI90.2%–
Kagi LLM BenchmarkKagi LLM Benchmark73.3%–
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize–89.5%
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize–61.4%
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize0.2%†7.0%
CritPtArtificial Analysis12.0%†17.7%
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis–33.5%
MysteryMechanismVals AI–25.2%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub41.0%†41.0%
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub13.0%29.0%
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub52.2%†49.4%
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub94.7%†96.0%
ForecastBenchForecastBench63.1%–
Coding
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub83.5%†–
SciCodeSciCode54.5%†57.4%
WeirdMLWeirdML76.4%–
Show all 164 benchmarks
MetricPublisherClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.7 (xhigh)
Coding
FrontierCodeCognition38.5%47.6%†
GSO-BenchGSO-Bench44.1%–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15461494
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)15551638
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench–84.5%†
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench82.1%†77.2%
SciCode (AA)Artificial Analysis–57.4%
LiveCodeBenchVals AI85.1%–
IOIVals AI–57.7%
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI82.0%–
Code MigrationVals AI43.9%44.8%
Code Migration v1.1Vals AI–53.2%
ProgramBenchVals AI0.0%0.5%
SWE-bench MultimodalVals AI–42.9%
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI71.0%86.2%
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAScale AI SEAL40.3%–
SWE Atlas: RefactoringScale AI SEAL48.6%–
SWE Atlas: Test WritingScale AI SEAL38.5%–
MirrorCodeEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub31.1%†–
CursorBenchCursor–46.3%
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub1323.0–
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–29.5%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis–25.8%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis83.2%†–
Startrise FrontendStartrise–75.9%†
GameBench 2 OverallDuelLab GameBench 2–63.4†
GameBench 2 by reasoning settingDuelLab GameBench 2–71.5
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–33.8%
FrontierCode 2.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis–28.7%
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench80.2%37.6%
OSWorld-Verified 2.0OSWorld18.2%†–
APEX-AgentsMercor49.2%†54.6%†
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)–2.7
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench–46.1%†
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench–49.3%†
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench50.7%†54.0%
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis51.5%†–
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis88.6%†–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI68.5%73.4%
MCP AtlasScale AI SEAL79.1%†–
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL41.7%–
τ³-bench Bankingτ²-bench40.2%†–
GDPval-AA v2.1, normalised scoreArtificial Analysis–60.7%
GDPval-AA v2.1Artificial Analysis–1718
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis34.6%†–
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis46.7%†42.1%
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis43.8%†52.5%
CyberBenchVals AI–69.5%
Finance Agent v2Vals AI51.5%52.3%
Finance Agent v2.1Vals AI–60.6%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1Vals AI–18.3%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI6.7%12.5%
Legal Research BenchVals AI38.5%47.1%
Robo-benchVals AI–0.2%
SREBenchVals AI–3.8%
Tax Agent BenchVals AI23.7%34.2%
Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)Vals AI68.5%–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI–28.8%
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI–10.0%
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)1210–
PostTrainBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub28.6%†–
ExploitBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub26.5%–
GBAEvalEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub43.8%–
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs10936.810536.8†
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis–65.6%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis–20.0%
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1Harvey–9.4%
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis–1637
GDPxGDPx by SemiAnalysis–3.9%
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–11.4%
CWE-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis–68.3%
DeepSec-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis–26.9%
CyberGym end-to-end (AA)Artificial Analysis–74.0%
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub70.2%†53.0%
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub31.7%†17.1%
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub86.7%†98.1%
ProofBenchVals AI54.0%†26.0%†
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench92.8%†95.7%
AIME (Vals)Vals AI96.3%–
AIME 2026MathArena95.8%†–
HMMT February 2026MathArena93.9%†–
MathArena ApexMathArena40.6%†–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)14911443
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub51.7%†56.0%
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench–76.9%†
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench–86.4%†
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench78.3%†76.9%
AA-Omniscience v1.1Artificial Analysis–31.2
MMLU-ProVals AI89.9%–
LegalBenchVals AI85.3%84.4%
CorpFinVals AI66.1%–
TaxEvalVals AI75.3%–
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL–47.6%
BioMysteryBenchVals AI–69.3%
CaseLaw v2Vals AI68.4%–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI63.7%67.0%
Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1Vals AI–71.5%
MedCodeVals AI54.9%49.5%
MedScribeVals AI83.0%89.4%
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI–65.6%
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub19.1%†–
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub21.0%†22.8%
AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracyArtificial Analysis–42.7%
AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis–80.0%
HealthBench Professional (AA)OpenAI–55.8%
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench77.9%†80.1%
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench66.7%†75.3%
IFBenchArtificial Analysis58.6%†–
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)14931438
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)14941441
EQ-Bench 4EQ-Bench1293–
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14831419
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)15141432
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)15081452
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)13171231
LiveBench DesignLiveBench–78.0%†
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis78.8%†78.2%†
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI85.5%–
MortgageTaxVals AI70.3%–
SAGEVals AI–88.7%
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub24.5%32.5%†
Code2Video-AAArtificial Analysis–1127
AA-3DArtificial Analysis–995
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis78.7%†76.7%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1494–
MLCRArtificial Analysis–20.0%
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub157.6156.1†
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench–70.1%†
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench76.5%†77.4%
AA Intelligence Index v5.0Artificial Analysis–35.5
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis40.7†46.5
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis312.5†322.7
Vals IndexVals AI–58.6
Vals Finance IndexVals AI–58.5%
Vals RSI IndexVals AI19.1%†20.2%
Vals Science IndexVals AI–34.8%
Vals Multimodal IndexVals AI67.4%–
Vals Router IndexVals AI–58.6%†
AA Cyber IndexArtificial Analysis–56.4

Data as of 2026-11-06. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

DuelLab GameBench 2, release gb2-20261103-09b2218cbd85 (https://benchmarks.duellab.org/releases/gb2-20261103-09b2218cbd85/), CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Scores mapped to BenchLeader model names; not endorsed by DuelLab.

What changed

  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh): 2 score revisions.
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh): 2 score revisions.
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh): 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh): BenchLeader Index 59.5 → 58.0.
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh): 5 new results (AA Intelligence Index v5.0, AA Progress Index v1, HLE-Diamond (AA)…); 4 score revisions; cost per task moved from $3.24/M to $7.51/M (132% up).
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh): cost per task moved from $3.74/M to $3.24/M (13% down).
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 score revision.
  • Claude Opus 4.7: 1 new result (Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1).
  • Grok 4.7 (xhigh): 9 new results (Code Migration v1.1, Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1, Finance Agent v2.1…).

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.7: questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Grok 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.7 leads on quality: 63.1 vs 58.3. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 4.7 is ahead overall as of 6 Nov 2026, but check the category scores for your use.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.7: which is cheaper, and will that change?
Grok 4.7 is cheaper today: $3.00 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Grok 4.7 better for coding?
They are level in coding (61 vs 62 on the category index). On Arena WebDev, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 1555 for Claude Opus 4.7 against 1638 for Grok 4.7.
Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.7 or Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 streams ~1.5× faster (71 vs 48 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Grok 4.7 better for agents and tool use?
Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in agentic tasks (65 vs 57 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Terminal-Bench, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 80.2% for Claude Opus 4.7 against 37.6% for Grok 4.7.
More questions (4)
Which is better for long documents?
Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1,000,000 against 500,000 tokens for Grok 4.7.
Which has lower latency?
Claude Opus 4.7 answers first: 1.0 s against 55.1 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.7?
Across the 23 benchmarks both have, Claude Opus 4.7 leads 11, Grok 4.7 leads 12. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Opus 4.7 ahead.
When was Grok 4.7 released?
Grok 4.7 was released on 21 Sep 2026.