BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases12

Grok 4.7 vs Muse Wonder Full

Full profiles: Grok 4.7 (SpaceXAI) and Muse Wonder Full (Meta): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 7 sources

As of 24 Oct 2026, Grok 4.7 (high) and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (63.9 vs 70.7, inside the ±11.4 margin of error) and close on price, so pick on the category that matters to you. Pick Grok 4.7 for knowledge (75 vs 71); pick Muse Wonder Full for reasoning (95 vs 61).

Grok 4.7 benchmarks high SpaceXAI Muse Wonder Full benchmarks max MetaOpen in the comparison tool

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
CodingMuse Wonder Full72 vs 65 category score; SciCode (AA) 62.6% vs 57.8%High
ReasoningMuse Wonder Full95 vs 61 category score; CritPt 32.9% vs 18.0%High
KnowledgeGrok 4.775 vs 71 category score; AA-Omniscience 30.9 vs 30.1Medium
Long documentsMuse Wonder Full67 vs 64 category score; AA-LCR 83.7% vs 77.0%Medium
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Grok 4.7 (high) and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (63.9 vs 70.7, within the ±11.4 margin).
  • Grok 4.7 (high) is stronger in knowledge.
  • Muse Wonder Full (max) is stronger in coding, composite, long context, reasoning.

At a glance

SpecGrok 4.7Muse Wonder Full
DeveloperSpaceXAIMeta
Released21 Sept 202612 Oct 2026
Context window (tokens)500,0001,000,000
Compared atGrok 4.7 (high)Muse Wonder Full (max)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$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.

CategoryGrok 4.7 (high)Muse Wonder Full (max)Leader
Reasoning60.994.9Muse Wonder Full
Coding64.872.3Muse Wonder Full
Knowledge75.471.4Grok 4.7
Long context63.567.0Muse Wonder Full
Composite81.391.9Muse Wonder Full

Where sources disagree

Across the 13 benchmarks both have, Grok 4.7 leads 2, Muse Wonder Full leads 11. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Wonder Full ahead.

Overall indexGrok 4.7 (high)Muse Wonder Full (max)Leader
BenchLeader Index63.970.7neck and neck
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.246.355.8Muse Wonder Full
Vals Index58.6†66.8Muse Wonder Full

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; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.

MeasureGrok 4.7 (high)Muse Wonder Full (max)
Blended price per 1M tokens$3.00–
Input / output per 1M$2.00 / $6.00– / –
Cached input per 1M$0.500–
Price per task: chat reply$0.0026–
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.028–
Price per task: code edit$0.021–
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.144–
Price per task: structured extraction$0.0052–
Cost to run a full benchmark suite$2.73–
Output speed91 tok/s–
Time to first answer19.6 s–
Time to a complete answer25.1 s–

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Grok 4.7 (high) scores 63.9 and takes 20 s to its first answer token; Grok 4.7 (xhigh) scores 61.6 in 35 s, Grok 4.7 (low) scores 61.0 in 4 s. Muse Wonder Full (max) scores 70.7. 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

110 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.

MetricPublisherGrok 4.7 (high)Muse Wonder Full (max)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader63.970.7
Coding scoreBenchLeader64.872.3
Composite scoreBenchLeader81.391.9
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader75.471.4
Long context scoreBenchLeader63.567.0
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader60.994.9
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$3.00–
Output speedBenchLeader91 tok/s–
Time to first answerBenchLeader19.6 s–
Context windowBenchLeader500,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub92.7%†–
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)1464†–
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench82.7%†–
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench82.7%†–
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis42.3%53.6%
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize90.2%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize58.3%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize10.0%–
CritPtArtificial Analysis18.0%32.9%
MysteryMechanismVals AI25.2%†35.1%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub41.0%†–
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub29.0%†–
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub49.4%†–
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub96.0%†–
Coding
SciCodeSciCode57.8%–
FrontierCodeCognition47.6%†–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)1493†–
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)1637†1726
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench84.5%†–
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench77.2%†–
SciCode (AA)Artificial Analysis57.8%62.6%
IOIVals AI57.7%†79.8%
Code MigrationVals AI44.8%†61.0%
Code Migration v1.1Vals AI53.2%†62.8%
ProgramBenchVals AI0.5%†0.5%
Show all 110 benchmarks
MetricPublisherGrok 4.7 (high)Muse Wonder Full (max)
Coding
SWE-bench MultimodalVals AI42.9%†47.3%
Vibe Code Bench 1-100Vals AI–34.0%
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI86.2%†86.0%
CursorBenchCursor43.9%–
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub29.5%†–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis24.8%57.1%
Startrise FrontendStartrise75.9%†–
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis34.1%44.9%
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench37.6%†–
APEX-AgentsMercor54.6%†–
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)3.2†–
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench50.1%†–
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench60.0%†–
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench54.0%†–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI73.4%†–
GDPval-AA v2.1Artificial Analysis60.4%67.8%
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis42.1%†–
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis55.0%–
CyberBenchVals AI69.5%†73.6%
Finance Agent v2Vals AI52.3%†59.1%
Finance Agent v2.1Vals AI60.6%†67.6%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1Vals AI18.3%†23.3%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI12.5%†21.7%
Legal Research BenchVals AI47.1%†53.4%
Robo-benchVals AI0.2%†10.4%
SREBenchVals AI3.8%†11.8%
Tax Agent BenchVals AI34.2%†43.0%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI28.8%†58.1%
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI10.0%†37.1%
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs10536.8†–
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis63.5%71.3%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis23.2%32.6%
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1Harvey9.4%†13.1%
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1639†1729
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis9.5%37.1%
CWE-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis68.3%†–
DeepSec-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis26.9%†–
CyberGym end-to-end (AA)Artificial Analysis74.0%†–
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub53.0%†–
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub17.1%†–
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub98.1%†–
ProofBenchVals AI26.0%†–
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench95.7%†–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)1443†–
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub56.0%†–
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench76.9%†–
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench86.4%†–
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench76.9%†–
AA-OmniscienceArtificial Analysis30.930.1
LegalBenchVals AI84.4%†87.4%
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL47.6%†–
BioMysteryBenchVals AI69.3%†73.3%
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI67.0%†71.9%
Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1Vals AI71.5%†75.0%
MedCodeVals AI49.5%†49.9%
MedScribeVals AI89.4%†89.3%
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI65.6%†73.8%
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub22.8%†–
AA-Omniscience: accuracyArtificial Analysis47.8%43.2%
AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis67.6%77.0%
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench80.1%†–
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench75.3%†–
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)1440†–
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)1441†–
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)1418†–
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)1431†–
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)1453†–
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1231†–
LiveBench DesignLiveBench78.0%†–
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis78.2%†–
SAGEVals AI40.8%†–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub32.5%†–
AA-3DArtificial Analysis995†–
Long context
AA-LCRArtificial Analysis77.0%83.7%
MLCRArtificial Analysis18.9%–
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub154.4†–
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench74.1%†–
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench77.4%†–
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis46.355.8
Vals IndexVals AI58.6†66.8
Vals Finance IndexVals AI58.5%†64.5%
Vals RSI IndexVals AI20.2%†24.4%
Vals Science IndexVals AI34.8%†48.5%
Vals Router IndexVals AI58.6%†66.8%†
AA Cyber IndexArtificial Analysis56.4†–

Data as of 2026-10-24. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)).
  • Muse Wonder Full (max): 9 new results (Code Migration v1.1, Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1, Finance Agent v2.1…).
  • Grok 4.7 (high): 1 new result (MLCR).
  • Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)).
  • Muse Wonder Full (max): BenchLeader Index 68.6 → 70.7.
  • Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Arena WebDev); 2 score revisions.
  • Grok 4.7 (high): 4 new results (AutomationBench, GDP.pdf (AA), FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)…).
  • Grok 4.7 (high): 1 new result (Analyst Agent (AA)).
  • Muse Wonder Full (max): 21 new results (IOI, LegalBench, Vals Index…).
  • Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Harvey LAB-AA v1.1).

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

Grok 4.7 vs Muse Wonder Full: questions

Is Grok 4.7 better than Muse Wonder Full?
Grok 4.7 (high) and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (63.9 vs 70.7, within the ±11.4 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 2026-10-24, so check the category scores for your use.
Is Grok 4.7 better than Muse Wonder Full for coding?
Muse Wonder Full scores higher in coding (72 vs 65 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Which is better for long documents?
Muse Wonder Full scores higher on long-context benchmarks (67 vs 64). Muse Wonder Full accepts more context: 1,000,000 against 500,000 tokens for Grok 4.7.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Grok 4.7 vs Muse Wonder Full?
Across the 13 benchmarks both have, Grok 4.7 leads 2, Muse Wonder Full leads 11. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Wonder Full ahead.
When was Muse Wonder Full released?
Muse Wonder Full was released on 12 Oct 2026.