Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) vs Grok Code Fast 1

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 90 to 40. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)'s sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 72.9 against 70.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 87.6% to 70.8%.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.20 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok Code Fast 1. That is roughly 16.7x on output cost alone. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok Code Fast 1 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Grok Code Fast 1.