| Signal | Claude Opus 4.7 | Delta | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +17 | |
Benchmarks | 93 | +7 | |
Pricing | 75 | -19 | |
Context window size | 86 | -4 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 85 | +65 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
94.7
current score
Claude Opus 4.7
right now
87.4
current score
Anthropic
xAI
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent saves you $1250.00/month
That's $15000.00/year compared to Claude Opus 4.7 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.7 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 95 | 87 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Rank | #2 | #20 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Quality Rank | #2 | #20 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Adoption Rank | #2 | #20 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1000K | 2000K | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
| Pricing | $5.00/$25.00/M | $2.00/$6.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 83 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Benchmarks | 93 | 86 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Pricing | 75 | 94 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
| Context window size | 86 | 90 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 20 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 95/100 (rank #2), placing it in the top 100% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 87/100 (rank #20), placing it in the top 93% of all 290 models tracked.
Claude Opus 4.7 has a 7-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably better performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent offers 73% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $120.00/month with Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent vs $450.00/month with Claude Opus 4.7 - a $330.00 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (2000K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($6.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (95/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Claude Opus 4.7 has a moderate advantage with a 7.299999999999997-point lead in composite score. It wins on more signal dimensions, but Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has specific strengths that could make it the better choice for certain workflows.
Best for Quality
Claude Opus 4.7
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
73% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Claude Opus 4.7
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Claude Opus 4.7
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Claude Opus 4.7
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Anthropic
| Capability | Claude Opus 4.7 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Anthropic
xAI
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent saves you $28.20/month
That's 72% cheaper than Claude Opus 4.7 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Claude Opus 4.7 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1M | 2M |
| Max Output Tokens | 128,000 | -- |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Apr 16, 2026 | Mar 31, 2026 |
The 68/100 vs 66/100 score differential translates to 3 ranking positions because the coding category is highly competitive with 320 models total. Grok's 2x larger context window (2M vs 1M tokens) and 4.2x cheaper output pricing ($6/M vs $25/M) likely give it the edge in practical deployment scenarios despite the marginal performance difference.
Claude Opus 4.7 is the only option here with native function calling support, making it essential for tool-integrated workflows despite costing $25/M output vs Grok's $6/M. The 128K max output tokens also gives Claude an advantage for generating large code files or documentation in single passes, whereas Grok's unspecified max output may require chunking strategies.
Grok's text+image+file modality versus Claude's text+image means you can directly process PDFs, CSVs, and other structured documents without preprocessing, saving significant pipeline complexity. Combined with the 2M token context window and $2/M input pricing (vs Claude's $5/M), Grok can ingest entire codebases or documentation sets 2.5x cheaper while maintaining a 68/100 performance score.
Assuming a 4:1 input/output ratio, Claude Opus 4.7 would cost $270/day ($200 input + $70 output) versus Grok's $76.80/day ($64 input + $12.80 output) - a 3.5x difference. The 2-point score gap (66 vs 68) is unlikely to justify this premium unless function calling is mandatory for your architecture.
While both support web search, Grok 4.20's 2M token context allows caching entire API documentation sets alongside your code, reducing search latency. Claude's 128K max output tokens means it can generate more comprehensive responses per query, but at $25/M output tokens, extensive documentation generation becomes expensive compared to Grok's $6/M pricing.