Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 or anthropic reports it surpasses fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning. Pick Grok 4.7 for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price or deepswe v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from grok 4.6's 65.2%; cursorbench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%. On a tight budget at scale, Grok 4.7 is the value pick.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) and Grok 4.7 (xAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Opus 5.5 is anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. Grok 4.7 is xAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Grok 4.7 is about 2× cheaper on input ($2/$6 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
Context window: Claude Opus 5.5 holds 2× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 500K tokens (~750 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Specifications
Spec
Claude Opus 5.5
Grok 4.7
Provider
Anthropic (US)
xAI (US)
Released
September 22, 2026
September 21, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
500K tokens (~750 pages)
Price (in/out)
$4/$20 per 1M tokens
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5: Claude Opus 5.5 — Grok 4.7 is comparatively weak here — reviewers note it arrives "late to the AI frontier party" against GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1 and Opus 5.5, all shipped in the weeks just before it
Anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning: Claude Opus 5.5 — Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.
Pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok: Claude Opus 5.5 — Its 1M tokens window holds about 2× more than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens in a single prompt.
2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from Grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price: Grok 4.7 — At $2/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5 ($4/$20 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
DeepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%: Grok 4.7 — XAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks — and it runs cheaper at $2/$6 per 1M tokens.
Trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems: Grok 4.7 — Claude Opus 5.5 is comparatively weak here — not a reasoning-ceiling upgrade over Fable 5.1 — pitched as matching its performance at lower cost, not beating it outright
Lowest cost at scale: Grok 4.7 — At $2/$6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input: Claude Opus 5.5 — Its 1M tokens window is about 2× larger than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Grok 4.7 — At $2/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Claude Opus 5.5 — Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5: Claude Opus 5.5 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price: Grok 4.7 — That is its strongest area.
Claude Opus 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. Released September 22, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5, anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning, pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok, and output speed increased over 30% versus Opus 5.
Its trade-offs are real: not a reasoning-ceiling upgrade over Fable 5.1 — pitched as matching its performance at lower cost, not beating it outright, like Opus 5, the headline 1M-token context is not uniformly available across every platform and plan — some API paths default to a smaller window, and first model in the 5.5 line; Anthropic has signaled Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5 are still weeks away, so the lower tiers of the family aren't out yet. At $4 in / $20 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Grok 4.7: where it fits
XAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks. Released September 21, 2026 by xAI, it is built for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from Grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price, deepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%, trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems, and xAI's strongest safety guardrails to date, per the company.
Its trade-offs: release was delayed at least five times since late July 2026 before shipping, 500K context window trails several rivals now sitting at 1M+, and reviewers note it arrives "late to the AI frontier party" against GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1 and Opus 5.5, all shipped in the weeks just before it. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.7 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Grok 4.7 costs less per token; Claude Opus 5.5 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5, Grok 4.7 for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Grok 4.7 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 5.5 leans toward performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 while Grok 4.7 leans toward 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 is cheaper — $4/$20 per 1M tokens vs $2/$6 per 1M tokens, roughly 2× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 5.5 — 1M tokens vs 500K tokens, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.7 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Opus 5.5 or Grok 4.7?
Claude Opus 5.5 — released September 22, 2026, about 1 days after Grok 4.7.
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Grok 4.7
Anthropic · US | xAI · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 or anthropic reports it surpasses fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning. Pick Grok 4.7 for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price or deepswe v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from grok 4.6's 65.2%; cursorbench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%. On a tight budget at scale, Grok 4.7 is the value pick.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) and Grok 4.7 (xAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Opus 5.5 is anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. Grok 4.7 is xAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Grok 4.7 is about 2× cheaper on input ($2/$6 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
▸Context window: Claude Opus 5.5 holds 2× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 500K tokens (~750 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Claude Opus 5.5
Grok 4.7
Provider
Anthropic (US)
xAI (US)
Released
September 22, 2026
September 21, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
500K tokens (~750 pages)
Price (in/out)
$4/$20 per 1M tokens
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5
Claude Opus 5.5
Grok 4.7 is comparatively weak here — reviewers note it arrives "late to the AI frontier party" against GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1 and Opus 5.5, all shipped in the weeks just before it
Anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning
Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.
Pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok
Claude Opus 5.5
Its 1M tokens window holds about 2× more than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens in a single prompt.
2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from Grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price
Grok 4.7
At $2/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5 ($4/$20 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
DeepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%
Grok 4.7
XAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks — and it runs cheaper at $2/$6 per 1M tokens.
Trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems
Grok 4.7
Claude Opus 5.5 is comparatively weak here — not a reasoning-ceiling upgrade over Fable 5.1 — pitched as matching its performance at lower cost, not beating it outright
Lowest cost at scale
Grok 4.7
At $2/$6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
Claude Opus 5.5
Its 1M tokens window is about 2× larger than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Grok 4.7
At $2/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Claude Opus 5.5
Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5
→ Claude Opus 5.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price
→ Grok 4.7
That is its strongest area.
Claude Opus 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. Released September 22, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5, anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning, pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok, and output speed increased over 30% versus Opus 5.
Its trade-offs are real: not a reasoning-ceiling upgrade over Fable 5.1 — pitched as matching its performance at lower cost, not beating it outright, like Opus 5, the headline 1M-token context is not uniformly available across every platform and plan — some API paths default to a smaller window, and first model in the 5.5 line; Anthropic has signaled Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5 are still weeks away, so the lower tiers of the family aren't out yet. At $4 in / $20 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Grok 4.7: where it fits
XAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks. Released September 21, 2026 by xAI, it is built for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from Grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price, deepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%, trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems, and xAI's strongest safety guardrails to date, per the company.
Its trade-offs: release was delayed at least five times since late July 2026 before shipping, 500K context window trails several rivals now sitting at 1M+, and reviewers note it arrives "late to the AI frontier party" against GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1 and Opus 5.5, all shipped in the weeks just before it. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.7 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Grok 4.7 costs less per token; Claude Opus 5.5 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5, Grok 4.7 for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.7 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 5.5 leans toward performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 while Grok 4.7 leans toward 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 is cheaper — $4/$20 per 1M tokens vs $2/$6 per 1M tokens, roughly 2× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 5.5 — 1M tokens vs 500K tokens, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.7 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Opus 5.5 or Grok 4.7?
Claude Opus 5.5 — released September 22, 2026, about 1 days after Grok 4.7.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.