Grok 4.7 (High) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) by Alibaba? 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 (High) scores 12.6 points higher (46.3 vs 33.7) but costs 2.9× as much to run the benchmark ($3881 vs $1336; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Grok 4.7 (High) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh).
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (High) | Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.3 | 33.7 | −27.2% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 27.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,880.88 | $1,336.09 | −65.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 65.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 31.16s | 59.76s | +91.8% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 91.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) vs Grok 4.7 (High): 27.2% less intelligence, 65.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 91.8% slower 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.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Grok 4.7 (High)Qwen3.8 27B (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/grok-4-7-high/qwen3-8-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/qwen3-8-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill