GLM-5.3 (Max) vs Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3 (Max) 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 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) scores 1.6 points higher (46.4 vs 44.8) but costs 2.0× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $2503; both flagship class). Pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GLM-5.3 (Max).
| Metric | GLM-5.3 (Max) | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 44.8 | 46.4 | +3.6% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 3.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,503.48 | $4,967.35 | +98.4% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 98.4% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 31.61s | 40.31s | +27.5% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 27.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.40 / $4.40 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs GLM-5.3 (Max): 3.6% more intelligence, 98.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 27.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- 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-5.3 (Max)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-5-3/grok-4-7 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3/grok-4-7?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill