Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Muse Spark 1.2

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.2 costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

50.3

Rank #48 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 9 categories and Muse Spark 1.2 in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.7 to 46.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 39% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 79.2% for Muse Spark 1.2.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 is cheaper at $1.25 / $4.25 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index58.350.3
Released2026-04-142026-08-05
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$4.25
Results tracked6631

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 59.6 (#13), Muse Spark 1.2: 49.2 (#51)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena WebDev15581533
SciCode54.5%56.4%
WeirdML76.4%60.3%
LMArena Coding15181495
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
DeepSWE—54.9%
FrontierCode38.5%—
FrontierSWE—12%
GSO44.1%—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Muse Spark 1.2: 29.4 (#87)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
APEX-Agents49.2%36.4%
GDP.pdf21%16%
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
PostTrainBench28.6%—
ExploitBench26.5%—
GBAEval43.8%—
LMArena Search1233—
Vending-Bench 210,937—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.8 (#29), Muse Spark 1.2: 51.3 (#34)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
SimpleBench61.7%74.5%
NYT Connections (extended)39%79.2%
CritPt12%17.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061486
DTBench94.7%94.7%
LMCA52.2%48.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25154.87
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
Chess Puzzles30%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Muse Spark 1.2: 46.4 (#70)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
ProofBench54%43%
LMArena Math14991471
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), Muse Spark 1.2: 54.1 (#53)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
SimpleQA Verified51.7%60.3%
LMArena Expert15211480
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—

Multimodal Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Muse Spark 1.2: 43.4 (#25)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision13161305
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Muse Spark 1.2: 57.1 (#11)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Non-English14801478
LMArena Chinese15311511
LMArena French15031513
LMArena Russian14941487
LMArena Spanish14951498
LMArena German1495—
LMArena Japanese1472—
LMArena Korean1464—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Muse Spark 1.2: 76.7 (#36)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Instruction Following14981461

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Muse Spark 1.2: 45.2 (#48)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Longer Query15051475

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Muse Spark 1.2: 72.3 (#14)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text14901482
LMArena Creative Writing14861449
EQ-Bench Creative Writing19141840
LMArena Multi-Turn15051494
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Muse Spark 1.2?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.2 costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Spark 1.2?

Muse Spark 1.2 is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $4.25 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Spark 1.2 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 49.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.2 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Muse Spark 1.2 share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.2 has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper