GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) vs Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI or Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) scores 30.9 points higher (46.4 vs 15.5) but costs 216× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $23.0; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 15.5, and GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) when 15.5 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 15.5 | 46.4 | +199.4% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 3.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $22.97 | $4,967.35 | +21525.4% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 216× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 4.87s | 49.93s | +925.3% Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is 925.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning): 199.4% more intelligence, 21525.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 925.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- 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.
GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning)Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-non-reasoning/grok-4-7 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-non-reasoning/grok-4-7?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill