I think it's worth dividing Europe up into several spheres before I try to this question. Some were part of the same knowledge networks as the Islamic polities in the Near East and North Africa, but others less so. I'd like to argue that the knowledge and technology available in some parts of Europe during this time period was very similar to what was available in Muslim Syria, Iraq, Egypt, or northwest Africa, though in others it was more limited.

I'll set the scene. In the south-east of Europe, directly abutting the Abbasid and Umayyad caliphates and then the Turkish states is the Eastern Roman (or Byzantine) empire. Its fortunes fluctuated wildly, but for most of this period it controlled Greece, Thrace, and much of Anatolia. In the centre-south is Italy. For most of this period, northern Italy was to some degree under the authority of the Holy Roman Emperor, though how strongly the emperor's authority could be felt there varied substantially. In practice the cities enjoyed broad autonomies. Southern Italy began this period under Byzantine rule, then Muslim, then Norman. In the south-west is Iberia, the majority of which is ruled by Islamic empires from the 730s until the very late 11th century, though Christian states such as Navarra, Castile, and Leon exist in the north. Then there is northern europe: Francia and its successor states, Britain, Ireland, Scandinavia, Poland, Lithuania, and many others. I'll leave out Eastern Europe to keep this textwall from becoming longer than several of the Platonic dialogues. A lot happened in these five centuries so by necessity I'm generalising terribly in all cases; feel free to skip the next few paragraphs if you want to get straight to my attempt to evaluate them according to these seven criteria.

Plenty of 'Greek knowledge' survived in the Eastern Roman Empire. In fact, interchange between the Byzantines and the Islamic and Italian states was a major route for knowledge transfer in this period. Al Ma'amun (Abbasid caliph 813-833), for example, sent out scholars to the Byzantine empire with money and instructions to find and translate Greek works. The Vienna Dioscurides, a manuscript of the medical and natural history text De materia medica, was loaned out to the 1st Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Rahman III (929-961) for his translators (including Sicilian physician Abu' Abd Allah (fl. 10thC)) to copy and return. For most of this period the Byzantines were deeper in contact with the Islamicate than they were with northern Europe, so these texts only really travelled north through the intermediaries of Italy and Iberia. Aristotle's works survived here while they were almost completely unknown in northern Europe. The Byzantine intellectual tradition is often imagined as being rather stagnant, but this is unfair. It produced logicians like Leo the Mathematician and Manuel Bryennios, commentators like Michael of Ephesus and Eustratius of Nicaea, and historians like Michael Psellos, Niketas Choniates, and John Skylitzes. In the 12th and 13th centuries there was a burst in interest in latin works and exchange with the Italian states increased, with Italian scholars like Burgundio of Pisa, James of Venice, and Pascalis Romanus going to Constantinople to translate and commentate Greek works.

Italy was one of the most densely populated parts of Europe in the middle ages and was influenced by Greek, Arabic, and Norman rulers. Muslim Sicily was very intellectually active: I've already mentioned the scholar Abu' Abd Allah, but also illustrative is that ibn al-Qatta cited 170 Sicilian poets of the 11th century in his encyclopedia The Precious Pearl on the Poets of the Island. The Normans, who established the Counties of Sicily and 'Apulia and Calabria' in 1071 and the Kingdom of Sicily in 1130, modelled their fiscal administration on that of the Fatimids and applied the Islamic dhimmi model by which Christians and Jews were protected groups back onto the Muslims themselves. Arabic authors under the Normans praise the interest of their kings in Arabic language and Islamic knowledge, and their patronage of Muslim writers, though things weren't always so great for Muslim courtiers such as during the 1154 trials and executions of certain 'palace saracens' on religious grounds. The kings of Sicily were also plugged into Byzantine knowledge networks; Emperor Manuel II sent a copy of Ptolemy's Almagest to William I as a gift in 1158. Ibn Jubayr, a Spanish Muslim traveller, visited the hospital of San Giovanni dei Lebbrosi outside Palermo in the 1180s and characterised it as following the model of Muslim hospitals in Acre and Tyre and examining and licensing physicians in the same way as was done in North Africa.

Northern Italy had been devastated by war at the beginning of this period and likely lost a great deal of its scholarly heritage. Translation activity started to pick up from the 11th century, when cities like Padua, Amalfi, Genoa and Venice became very well-connected to the knowledge networks of the eastern mediterranean and accumulated many Greek and Arabic texts.

The broad strokes of medieval Iberian scholarly history are also worth marking out. During the period of the Emirate and then Caliphate of Córdoba, 'al-Andalus' was a hub of culture and scholarship. In the 11th century the caliphate fragmented into little pieces; the Almoravids of North Africa eventually came to control most of its former territory. This was the home of ibn Rushd (latinised as Averroes), whose commentaries and expansions on the works of Aristotle had a vast impact on western European intellectual history (but were less relevant in the Near East). After the Almoravids and the Almohads, the Christian kingdoms came to control progressively more and more of the peninsula. The translation school that began in Toledo in the 12th century may have been the site of the most important transfer of Greek and Islamicate knowledge to western and northern Europe of all.

It's also important to note the importance of Jewish communities in these networks of exchange. The Cairo Geniza, a vast collection of documents from Fustat in Egypt, provides us with an image of a tremendous network of Jewish merchants and professionals in the 10th to 13th centuries, spanning from Spain to India and from Samarkand to Genoa. Maimonides, who lived in Spain, Morocco, and Egypt, is the most prominent Jewish philosopher of this period. He strove to synthesise Aristotleian philosophy with Jewish tradition.

In all of these cases, the Islamic, Jewish, and Christian intellectual spheres were in close contact. Regarding your question (1), literacy in all of these regions is assumed to have been high in comparison to northern Europe, though estimates are unreliable. (2&4), The same ancient philosophers, physicians, and scientists were generally esteemed by scholars in all of these locations, though Muslim, Jewish, and Christian philosophers were not likely to be esteemed outside their religious community with some notable exceptions like ibn Rushd and ibn Sina (Avicenna). I'm not aware of any work that's been done on life expectancies in the medieval Islamicate, ERE, etc, though for western Europe see below. (5), It's difficult to compare religious tolerance in two places or times, but people of many faiths achieved high status positions in Muslim and Christian Sicily, though I don't know of any prominent Muslims in the Byzantine empire or Christian-ruled Iberia. In (most) Muslim states, a mechanism existed by which Christian and Jewish communities were classified as dhimmi and protected to varying degrees. While the Norman rulers of Sicily used something similar, most Christian states did not provide Muslims with any legal protections, and Jewish people tended to be classed as servi of the monarch, making them very vulnerable.

For (6), while the level of commerce in any one region was not a constant through this period, Constantinople, Venice, Genoa, Salerno, Naples, and Milan often compared favourably in size and economic activity to Baghdad, Fustat, Cairo, Alexandria, Damascus, Córdoba, and Seville. Palermo and Antioch did well under rulers of both religions. (3) is a difficult question. The Islamicate had plenty of its own sectarianism and internecine strife. The translation culture of the Abbasid caliphate was an incredible phenomenon, but as were the Carolingian renaissance and the Toledo translation movement. It seems to me that neither the Islamicate nor European Christendom was essentially more open to philosophy or scientific thinking than the other; there were periods and places in both where a great deal of openness can be observed. As for (7), I don't think we can talk about a concept of 'barbarian-ness' comparable to the Greek concept in Islamicate ideology. Generally, they highly esteemed Greek culture and thought and were open to Jewish and Syriac thought too. Though they had a more mixed view on 'Franks' (a term often applied to northern and western European Christians in general), they did not really imagine them as being lower on a hierarchy of civilisation. The division between the House of Islam (the Ummah) and everything else was much more important, ideologically.