LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.3

Updated October 21, 2026. 84 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Claude Opus 4.7Anthropic
Coding
51.1
Overall
40.7
Output $/M
$25.00
78
Grok 4.3xAI
Coding
22.5
Overall
24.9
Output $/M
$2.50
5
vs boards won of 84 shared, 1 tied

Decision reading

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 51.1 on the Vibe Coding Index against 22.5 for Grok 4.3.

Pick Grok 4.3 when output tokens cost 10.0x less, or when a solved task costs $0.31 against $2.95.

Shared results
84
Claude Opus 4.7 only
17
Grok 4.3 only
20
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.7 51.1 from 1 benchmark, Grok 4.3 22.5 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Agentic work, 26.3 points apart on average over 8 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vending-Bench 2: Claude Opus 4.7 $10,937 against Grok 4.3 $35, 68.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.7 $25.00 against Grok 4.3 $2.50 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
Context window
Both take 1M tokens.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.7BarsGrok 4.3Ties
Coding1401 tie
Intelligence10
Agentic work71
Reasoning101
Math60
Knowledge102
General301
All shared boards7851 tie
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index140
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
LMArena WebDev15581358Claude Opus 4.7
AA Coding Index73.642.2Claude Opus 4.7
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.1%84.5%Claude Opus 4.7
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)82.0%71.4%Claude Opus 4.7
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)71.0%19.4%Claude Opus 4.7
Code migration (Vals AI)43.9%6.8%Claude Opus 4.7
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%0.0%Tie
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)68.5%42.0%Claude Opus 4.7
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured40.6%Only Grok 4.3 measured
SciCodeNot measured48.3%Only Grok 4.3 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)54.5%37.9%Claude Opus 4.7
Terminal-Bench80.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
FrontierCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
GSO-Bench44.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
WeirdML76.4%49.9%Claude Opus 4.7
MirrorCode31.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured944.2Only Grok 4.3 measured
LMArena Text: coding15191415Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: software and IT15161416Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena WebDev: React15601353Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena WebDev: HTML15541367Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena WebDev: from an image15771375Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
AA Intelligence Index40.724.9Claude Opus 4.7
Epoch Capabilities Index156.8Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index71
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
AA Agentic Index38.615.5Claude Opus 4.7
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1126Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1006Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1059Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured967Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured914Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1007Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1008Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1012Only Grok 4.3 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)51.5%37.7%Claude Opus 4.7
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)23.7%6.2%Claude Opus 4.7
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)38.5%15.4%Claude Opus 4.7
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)63.7%18.4%Claude Opus 4.7
τ²-Bench Telecom88.6%97.7%Grok 4.3
APEX-Agents49.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
OSWorld 2.018.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
PostTrainBench28.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Vending-Bench 2$10,937$35Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Search12301166Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index101
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
GPQA Diamond90.2%91.4%Grok 4.3
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)85.5%83.1%Claude Opus 4.7
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.4%90.1%Claude Opus 4.7
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.3%37.2%Claude Opus 4.7
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.2%88.8%Claude Opus 4.7
ARC-AGI93.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
ARC-AGI-275.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
SimpleBench61.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Chess puzzles41.0%18.0%Claude Opus 4.7
Mystery game puzzles28.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
EBR-bench19.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts15061396Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: expert15211384Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15081402Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: diagrams13361241Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: homework13371241Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
AIME96.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
OTIS Mock AIME97.8%93.3%Claude Opus 4.7
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 370.2%42.8%Claude Opus 4.7
FrontierMath, tier 431.7%14.6%Claude Opus 4.7
ProofBench54.0%11.0%Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: math14981387Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: mathematical work15091396Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index102
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
MMLU Pro89.9%85.8%Claude Opus 4.7
LegalBench (Vals AI)85.3%84.5%Claude Opus 4.7
CaseLaw (Vals AI)68.4%79.3%Grok 4.3
CorpFin (Vals AI)66.1%68.5%Grok 4.3
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.3%70.8%Claude Opus 4.7
MortgageTax (Vals AI)70.3%48.3%Claude Opus 4.7
MedCode (Vals AI)54.9%38.1%Claude Opus 4.7
SimpleQA Verified51.7%33.2%Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: science15081399Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14951384Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: legal and government15041386Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: business and finance14901381Claude Opus 4.7
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1196Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1192Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1174Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1180Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1125Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1187Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1081Only Grok 4.3 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1125Only Grok 4.3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index301
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured51.7%Only Grok 4.3 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)56.1%19.7%Claude Opus 4.7
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.0%74.4%Claude Opus 4.7
Vals Multimodal Index67.4%43.3%Claude Opus 4.7
IFBench58.6%83.3%Grok 4.3
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.7%75.0%Claude Opus 4.7
DTBench94.7%90.7%Claude Opus 4.7
LMCA52.2%38.3%Claude Opus 4.7
Furniture assembly33.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
ExploitBench26.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
LMArena Text14901397Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: instruction following14981366Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: creative writing14861380Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision13171229Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: English14961404Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: non-English14801385Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Chinese15311422Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: German14951395Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Japanese14741379Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Korean14641354Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: French15031411Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Spanish14941399Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Russian14941399Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: Polish14891398Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: multi-turn15051406Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: longer queries15051393Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: writing and language14921385Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14741370Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: English13221235Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: Chinese13711257Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: reading text13271235Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: humor13091222Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: recognizing things12781217Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Vision: creative writing13261237Claude Opus 4.7
LMArena Document1495Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Grok 4.3Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.7$0.018Fits in one request
Grok 4.3$0.0025Fits in one request

Grok 4.3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.7$0.325Fits in one request
Grok 4.3$0.070Fits in one request

Grok 4.3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.7$1.25Fits in one request
Grok 4.3$0.275Fits in one request

Grok 4.3 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.7 and Grok 4.3
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.7SpaceXAI Grok 4.3
MakerAnthropicxAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 16, 2026April 30, 2026
Context window1M1M
Input $/Mtok$5.00$1.25
Output $/Mtok$25.00$2.50
Coding index51.122.5
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved task$2.95$0.31
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Grok 4.3 for coding?

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 51.1 on the Vibe Coding Index against 22.5 for Grok 4.3. Pick Grok 4.3 when output tokens cost 10.0x less, or when a solved task costs $0.31 against $2.95.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Grok 4.3?

Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Grok 4.3 costs $1.25 and $2.50. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Claude Opus 4.7 costs $2.95 and Grok 4.3 $0.31.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Grok 4.3?

Neither: both take 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok 4.3 comparison based on?

84 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.7's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Grok 4.3's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next