Grok 4.7 (High) vs Muse Ember (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI or Muse Ember (Xhigh) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-10.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (High) scores 1.1 points higher (35.2 vs 34.1) but costs 49× as much to run the benchmark ($4722 vs $95.7; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (High) when you need intelligence above 34.1, and Muse Ember (Xhigh) when 34.1 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (High) | Muse Ember (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 35.2 | 34.1 | −3.1% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 3.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,721.61 | $95.73 | −98.0% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 98.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 46.50s | 9.48s | −79.6% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 79.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Ember (Xhigh) vs Grok 4.7 (High): 3.1% less intelligence, 98.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 79.6% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.7 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Fable 5.2 (Medium, Default Fallback) scores 56.40 for $3360.
- Muse Ember (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Grok 4.7 (High)Muse Ember (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/muse-ember-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/muse-ember-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill