Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Muse Spark 1.3

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 54.8 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.3 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 . 35 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

Muse Spark 1.3 Meta

54.8

Rank #27 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 35 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 6 categories and Muse Spark 1.3 in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 62.6 to 42.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 39% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 85.1% for Muse Spark 1.3.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 is cheaper at $1.25 / $4.25 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index58.354.8
Released2026-04-142026-09-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$25$4.25
Results tracked6637

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 1.3: 56.6 (#21)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
LMArena WebDev15581657
SciCode54.5%59.7%
LMArena Coding15181514
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
CursorBench—41.6%
GSO44.1%—
WeirdML76.4%—
MirrorCode31.1%—
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), Muse Spark 1.3: 38.6 (#30)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
APEX-Agents49.2%57.8%
GDP.pdf21%27.6%
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
PostTrainBench28.6%—
ExploitBench26.5%—
GBAEval43.8%—
LMArena Search1233—
Vending-Bench 210,937—

Reasoning Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.8 (#29), Muse Spark 1.3: 54.0 (#27)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
NYT Connections (extended)39%85.1%
CritPt12%26%
Chess Puzzles30%38%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061503
Mystery Game Puzzles28%25%
DTBench94.7%96.5%
LMCA52.2%53.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25156.75
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
Bench to the Future 3—0.14
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), Muse Spark 1.3: 73.1 (#21)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%74.4%
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%99.2%
ProofBench54%58%
LMArena Math14991494
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
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 1.3: 42.6 (#95)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
LMArena Expert15211516
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—

Multimodal Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), Muse Spark 1.3: 43.7 (#22)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
LMArena Vision13161309
LMArena Document14951471
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—

Multilingual Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), Muse Spark 1.3: 57.4 (#8)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
LMArena Non-English14801481
LMArena Chinese15311529
LMArena French15031524
LMArena German14951515
LMArena Japanese14721474
LMArena Korean14641501
LMArena Russian14941490
LMArena Spanish14951490

Instruction Following Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), Muse Spark 1.3: 77.5 (#22)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
LMArena Instruction Following14981477

Long Context Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), Muse Spark 1.3: 45.6 (#32)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
LMArena Longer Query15051488

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), Muse Spark 1.3: 73.6 (#9)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Spark 1.3
LMArena Text14901490
LMArena Creative Writing14861455
EQ-Bench Creative Writing19141906
LMArena Multi-Turn15051482
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Muse Spark 1.3?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 54.8 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.3 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 1.3?

Muse Spark 1.3 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 1.3 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 56.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.3 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and Muse Spark 1.3 share?

35 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.3 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper