Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Muse Spark

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

71.63/100
Margin
0.6pts
← winning
71/100
1 category wins0 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: Claude Opus 4.7 supported; Muse Spark supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 and Muse Spark share 16 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7; 25 to Muse Spark.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
16
Claude Opus 4.7 only
6
Muse Spark only
25
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Muse Spark only becomes the better choice if you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Opus 4.7 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 69 to 63. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Opus 4.7's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 38.6 against 32.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), 22.917% to 14.600%.

Muse Spark is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.7 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 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 and Muse Spark
CategoryClaude Opus 4.7ΔMuse Spark
MathClaude Opus 4.738.6Margin← 5.7Muse Spark32.9
AgenticClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark59.0
CodingClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark67.8
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark42.5
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark50.4
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.7Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark82.5

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Opus 4.7B · Muse Spark

  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 22.917%B 14.600%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7Δ 8.3
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Opus 4.7 scored 22.917%; Muse Spark scored 14.600%. Claude Opus 4.7 wins this benchmark.

  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 43.793%B 39.000%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7Δ 4.8
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Opus 4.7 scored 43.793%; Muse Spark scored 39.000%. Claude Opus 4.7 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.7$5 input / $25 outputMuse SparkNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.7Not availableMuse SparkNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.7Not availableMuse SparkNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.71MMuse Spark262KClaude Opus 4.7 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 74%91.5%Muse Spark leads
Gert LabsSource 65.59%—Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 20.7%—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 13.9%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —59%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —74.8%Not comparable
CyberGymSource —43.5%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —63.8%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource —28.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —32.2%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1144Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 71.00%19.67%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
React Native EvalsSource 82.8%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 54.5%45.5%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 50.1%51.5%Muse Spark leads
FrontierCodeSource 38.5%—Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource —77.4%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource —52.4%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench ProSource —80.0%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource —58.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkResult
AA-LCRSource 67.0%69.7%Muse Spark leads
CritPtSource 5.1%11.3%Muse Spark leads
ARC-AGI-2Source —42.5%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.7%43.1%Muse Spark leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 88.5%88.4%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-HLESource 31.2%39.9%Muse Spark leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 14.2%4.1%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.5%44.6%Muse Spark leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 51.9%73.2%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
GPQA-DSource —89.5%Not comparable
HLESource —50.4%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource —42.8%Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource —42.8%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source —52.6%Not comparable
MathClaude Opus 4.7 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 43.793%39.000%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 22.917%14.600%Claude Opus 4.7 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 76.4%80.5%Muse Spark leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1328—Not comparable
CharXivSource —86.4%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
GDPval-AASource —1444Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse SparkResult
AA-IFBenchSource 43.6%75.9%Muse Spark leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 63. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4), where the scores are 22.917% and 14.600%.

Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.7 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 38.6 versus 32.9. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) 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 16, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.