Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok Code Fast 2 for coding
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger coder of the two on benchmarks, but Grok Code Fast 2 can be the better pick when cost, speed, or context window matter more. Below: a side-by-side spec table and exactly when to pick each.
At a glance
| Spec | Claude Opus 4.7 | Grok Code Fast 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Released | Nov 2025 | Dec 2025 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 72% | 65% |
| HumanEval | 94% | 91% |
| MMLU | 88% | 85% |
| Context window | 200K | 256K |
| Max output | 32K | 32K |
| Input price (per 1M) | $15 | $0.20 |
| Output price (per 1M) | $75 | $1.50 |
| Price tier | Premium | Budget |
| Speed | Slow/Reasoning | Fast |
| Hosting | Closed/API | Closed/API |
| Modality | Multimodal (vision) | Text |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2026 | Nov 2025 |
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 if…
- It scores higher on SWE-bench Verified (72% vs 65%), the best proxy for real-world coding.
- It's tuned for complex refactors, agentic coding, hard debugging, deep reasoning.
Pick Grok Code Fast 2 if…
- It's cheaper (Budget tier vs Premium).
- It has a larger context window (256K vs 200K).
- It responds faster (Fast).
- It's tuned for high-volume agentic coding where latency and cost trump max intelligence.
Claude Opus 4.7 vs Grok Code Fast 2: which is better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger coder of the two on benchmarks, but Grok Code Fast 2 can be the better pick when cost, speed, or context window matter more. See the full spec table for SWE-bench, HumanEval, MMLU, context window, and pricing on both. Benchmarks are a directional signal, not a guarantee for your codebase — the most reliable test is running both on a real task you care about.
Compare these head-to-head with live data, or build a full stack around your pick — Flowpicker shows compatibility and monthly cost.
Open the live comparison →More comparisons
See the full model leaderboard ranked by SWE-bench, HumanEval, and MMLU.