GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) vs Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) by Z AI or Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI? 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 (Xhigh) scores 20.3 points higher (46.4 vs 26.1) but costs 3.3× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $1487; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 26.1, and GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) when 26.1 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.1 | 46.4 | +77.8% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 77.8% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,486.78 | $4,967.35 | +234.1% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 3.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 60.76s | 35.66s | −41.3% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 41.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.28 / $4.07 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs GLM-5.1 (Reasoning): 77.8% more intelligence, 234.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 41.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
GLM-5.1 (Reasoning)Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)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/glm-5-1/grok-4-7 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-1/grok-4-7?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill