# 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.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-muse-spark-1-2
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 29

## 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.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 58.3 | 50.3 |
| Rank | 19 | 48 |
| Context | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $5 | $1.25 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $4.25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | 1533 |
| SciCode | 54.5% | 56.4% |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | 60.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1518 | 1495 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | — |
| DeepSWE | — | 54.9% |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| FrontierSWE | — | 12% |
| GSO | 44.1% | — |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,323 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | 36.4% |
| GDP.pdf | 21% | 16% |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 40.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 43.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1233 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,937 | — |

## Reasoning

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | 74.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 39% | 79.2% |
| CritPt | 12% | 17.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1506 | 1486 |
| DTBench | 94.7% | 94.7% |
| LMCA | 52.2% | 48.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.25 | 154.87 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 93.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 72.8% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 19% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 28% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |

## Math

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 54% | 43% |
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1471 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 70.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 73.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |

## Knowledge

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | 60.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | 1480 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |

## Multimodal

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | 1305 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |

## Multilingual

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1480 | 1478 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1531 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1503 | 1513 |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | 1487 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1495 | 1498 |
| LMArena German | 1495 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1464 | — |

## Instruction Following

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | 1461 |

## Long Context

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | 1475 |

## Writing & Preference

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1490 | 1482 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | 1449 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | 1840 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1505 | 1494 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |

## FAQ

### 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.