Grok 4.7 (High) vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI or Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (High) scores 28.8 points higher (46.3 vs 17.5) but costs 27× as much to run the benchmark ($3881 vs $146; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (High) when you need intelligence above 17.5, and Muse Glimmer (High) when 17.5 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (High) | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.3 | 17.5 | −62.2% Muse Glimmer (High) is 62.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,880.88 | $145.77 | −96.2% Muse Glimmer (High) is 96.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 25.34s | 24.78s | −2.2% Muse Glimmer (High) is 2.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Glimmer (High) vs Grok 4.7 (High): 62.2% less intelligence, 96.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 2.2% 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, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- Muse Glimmer (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
Grok 4.7 (High)Muse Glimmer (High)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights 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-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill