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%. Pick Muse Spark 1.1 for scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported) or subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck. On a tight budget at scale, Muse Spark 1.1 is the value pick.
Grok 4.7 (xAI) and Muse Spark 1.1 (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. 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. Muse Spark 1.1 is meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Muse Spark 1.1 is about 1.6× cheaper on input ($1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens vs $2/$6 per 1M tokens) — modest, but it adds up at steady volume.
Context window: Muse Spark 1.1 holds 2.1× more — 1M (~1,573 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.
Recency: Grok 4.7 is the newer model by about 2 months (released September 21, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Grok 4.7
Muse Spark 1.1
Provider
xAI (US)
Meta (US)
Released
September 21, 2026
July 9, 2026
Context window
500K tokens (~750 pages)
1M (~1,573 pages)
Price (in/out)
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
$1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
54.1%
Who wins what
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 — 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 is the newer of the two.
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 — Grok 4.7 lists deepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4% among its strengths; Muse Spark 1.1 does not.
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 — Grok 4.7 lists trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems among its strengths; Muse Spark 1.1 does not.
Scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported): Muse Spark 1.1 — At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok 4.7 ($2/$6 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck: Muse Spark 1.1 — Meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding — and it runs cheaper at $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens.
Professional agentic work — 54.7 on JobBench, a wide margin over rivals (vendor-reported): Muse Spark 1.1 — Grok 4.7 is comparatively weak here — 500K context window trails several rivals now sitting at 1M+
Lowest cost at scale: Muse Spark 1.1 — At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input: Muse Spark 1.1 — Its 1M window is about 2.1× larger than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens, fitting roughly 1,573 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Muse Spark 1.1 — At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok 4.7, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Muse Spark 1.1 — Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
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 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported): Muse Spark 1.1 — That is its strongest area.
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 are real: 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.
Muse Spark 1.1: where it fits
Meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding. Released July 9, 2026 by Meta, it is built for scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported), subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck, professional agentic work — 54.7 on JobBench, a wide margin over rivals (vendor-reported), and managing its own context: it compacts the 1M window mid-run instead of relying on external windowing.
Its trade-offs: not the coding leader its launch framing implied — Meta's own report concedes it trails Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 on every coding benchmark, the 1M window oversells its recall: 54.1 on MRCR v2 at 1M against GPT-5.5's 74.0, closed weights end the free, self-hostable Llama path — this is the first model Meta has charged for, and uS-only public preview behind a waitlist, and every benchmark is vendor-reported with no third-party replication. At $1.25 in / $4.25 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Grok 4.7 and Muse Spark 1.1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Muse Spark 1.1 costs less per token; Muse Spark 1.1 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — 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, Muse Spark 1.1 for scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.7 or Muse Spark 1.1 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, 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 while Muse Spark 1.1 leans toward scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper — $2/$6 per 1M tokens vs $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.6× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.1 — 1M vs 500K tokens, about 2.1× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Grok 4.7 and Muse Spark 1.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Grok 4.7, Muse Spark 1.1 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, Grok 4.7 or Muse Spark 1.1?
Grok 4.7 — released September 21, 2026, about 2 months after Muse Spark 1.1.
Grok 4.7 vs Muse Spark 1.1
xAI · US | Meta · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
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%. Pick Muse Spark 1.1 for scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported) or subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck. On a tight budget at scale, Muse Spark 1.1 is the value pick.
Grok 4.7 (xAI) and Muse Spark 1.1 (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. 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. Muse Spark 1.1 is meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Muse Spark 1.1 is about 1.6× cheaper on input ($1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens vs $2/$6 per 1M tokens) — modest, but it adds up at steady volume.
▸Context window: Muse Spark 1.1 holds 2.1× more — 1M (~1,573 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.
▸Recency: Grok 4.7 is the newer model by about 2 months (released September 21, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Grok 4.7
Muse Spark 1.1
Provider
xAI (US)
Meta (US)
Released
September 21, 2026
July 9, 2026
Context window
500K tokens (~750 pages)
1M (~1,573 pages)
Price (in/out)
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
$1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
54.1%
Who wins what
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
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 is the newer of the two.
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
Grok 4.7 lists deepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4% among its strengths; Muse Spark 1.1 does not.
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
Grok 4.7 lists trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems among its strengths; Muse Spark 1.1 does not.
Scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported)
Muse Spark 1.1
At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok 4.7 ($2/$6 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck
Muse Spark 1.1
Meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding — and it runs cheaper at $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens.
Professional agentic work — 54.7 on JobBench, a wide margin over rivals (vendor-reported)
Muse Spark 1.1
Grok 4.7 is comparatively weak here — 500K context window trails several rivals now sitting at 1M+
Lowest cost at scale
Muse Spark 1.1
At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
Muse Spark 1.1
Its 1M window is about 2.1× larger than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens, fitting roughly 1,573 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Muse Spark 1.1
At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok 4.7, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Muse Spark 1.1
Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
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
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported)
→ Muse Spark 1.1
That is its strongest area.
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 are real: 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.
Muse Spark 1.1: where it fits
Meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding. Released July 9, 2026 by Meta, it is built for scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported), subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck, professional agentic work — 54.7 on JobBench, a wide margin over rivals (vendor-reported), and managing its own context: it compacts the 1M window mid-run instead of relying on external windowing.
Its trade-offs: not the coding leader its launch framing implied — Meta's own report concedes it trails Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 on every coding benchmark, the 1M window oversells its recall: 54.1 on MRCR v2 at 1M against GPT-5.5's 74.0, closed weights end the free, self-hostable Llama path — this is the first model Meta has charged for, and uS-only public preview behind a waitlist, and every benchmark is vendor-reported with no third-party replication. At $1.25 in / $4.25 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Grok 4.7 and Muse Spark 1.1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Muse Spark 1.1 costs less per token; Muse Spark 1.1 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — 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, Muse Spark 1.1 for scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Grok 4.7 and Muse Spark 1.1 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, 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 while Muse Spark 1.1 leans toward scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper — $2/$6 per 1M tokens vs $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.6× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.1 — 1M vs 500K tokens, about 2.1× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Grok 4.7 and Muse Spark 1.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Grok 4.7, Muse Spark 1.1 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, Grok 4.7 or Muse Spark 1.1?
Grok 4.7 — released September 21, 2026, about 2 months after Muse Spark 1.1.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.