Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) vs Muse Spark

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 25 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

66.27/100
Margin
4.8pts
winning →
71.04/100
4 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) #27 (Estimated); Muse Spark #13 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) and Muse Spark share 25 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive); 14 to Muse Spark.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
25
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) only
13
Muse Spark only
14
Comparable categories
5 / 8

Pick Muse Spark if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) only becomes the better choice if reasoning is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 25 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Muse Spark is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 71.04 to 66.27. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Muse Spark's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 82.5 against 65.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is ARC-AGI-2, 75.8% to 42.5%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) does hit back in reasoning, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Muse Spark.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) and Muse Spark
CategoryClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)ΔMuse Spark
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.8Margin← 33.3Muse Spark42.5
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)65.1Margin→ 17.4Muse Spark82.5
AgenticClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.1Margin← 16.1Muse Spark59.0
CodingClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)78.6Margin← 10.8Muse Spark67.8
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)60.0Margin← 9.6Muse Spark50.4
MathClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark32.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)B · Muse Spark

  1. ARC-AGI-2

    Reasoning
    Source ↗
    A 75.8%B 42.5%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 33.3
    ARC-AGI-2: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 75.8%; Muse Spark scored 42.5%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 64.3%B 52.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 11.9
    SWE-bench Pro: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 64.3%; Muse Spark scored 52.4%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark.

  3. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 69.4%B 59%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 10.4
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 69.4%; Muse Spark scored 59%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark.

  4. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 87.6%B 77.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 10.2
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 87.6%; Muse Spark scored 77.4%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark.

  5. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 91%B 86.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 4.6
    CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 91%; Muse Spark scored 86.4%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)$5 input / $25 outputMuse SparkNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not availableMuse SparkNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not availableMuse SparkNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)1MMuse Spark262KClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 69.4%59%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
BrowseCompSource 79.3%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 77.3%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 78%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource 73.1%43.5%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 44.4%28.7%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 88.6%91.5%Muse Spark leads
GDPval-AASource 49.8%32.2%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
GDPval-AASource 14951144Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
OSWorld 2.0Source 18.2%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 45.9%—Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 46.7%—Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —74.8%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —63.8%Not comparable
CodingClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 87.6%77.4%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
SWE-bench ProSource 64.3%52.4%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 69.4%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 73.6%58.6%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-SciCodeSource 54.5%51.5%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
LiveCodeBench ProSource —80.0%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource —19.67%Not comparable
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkResult
MRCR v2 128K-256KSource 59.2%—Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 75.8%42.5%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-LCRSource 70.3%69.7%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
CritPtSource 12.0%11.3%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkResult
GPQASource 94.2%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 94.2%89.5%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
HLESource 54.7%50.4%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 46.9%42.8%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 53.5%43.1%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 91.4%88.4%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-HLESource 39.6%39.9%Muse Spark leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 26.2%4.1%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 45.8%44.6%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 36.2%73.2%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
HealthBench HardSource —42.8%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source —52.6%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkResult
FrontierMath (legacy)Source 43.8%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source —39.000%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source —14.600%Not comparable
MultimodalMuse Spark wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkResult
OfficeQA ProSource 43.6%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 91%86.4%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 82.1%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.8%80.5%Muse Spark leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1325—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource —80.4%Not comparable
ERQASource —64.7%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource —71.3%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource —84.1%Not comparable
ZeroBenchSource —33.0%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source —78.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Muse SparkResult
AA-IFBenchSource 58.6%75.9%Muse Spark leads
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Muse Spark?

Muse Spark is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 71.04 to 66.27. The biggest single separator in this matchup is ARC-AGI-2, where the scores are 75.8% and 42.5%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60 versus 50.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 78.6 versus 67.8. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 75.8 versus 42.5. Inside this category, ARC-AGI-2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.1 versus 59. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or Muse Spark?

Muse Spark has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.5 versus 65.1. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.