Grok 4.7 (High) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? 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 (High) scores 16.8 points higher (46.3 vs 29.5) but costs 1.7× as much to run the benchmark ($3881 vs $2277; both flagship class). Pick Grok 4.7 (High) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.7 Max.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (High) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.3 | 29.5 | −36.3% Qwen3.7 Max is 36.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,880.88 | $2,277.12 | −41.3% Qwen3.7 Max is 41.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 25.34s | 16.61s | −34.5% Qwen3.7 Max is 34.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs Grok 4.7 (High): 36.3% less intelligence, 41.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 34.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.7 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- Qwen3.7 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 (High)Qwen3.7 MaxToday'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/grok-4-7-high/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill