Grok 4.7 (High) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Medium)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) 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 18.7 points higher (46.3 vs 27.6) but costs 3.3× as much to run the benchmark ($3881 vs $1165; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (High) when you need intelligence above 27.6, and Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) when 27.6 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (High) | Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.3 | 27.6 | −40.4% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 40.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,880.88 | $1,165.00 | −70.0% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 70.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 25.34s | 55.12s | +117.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 117.5% 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 (Medium) vs Grok 4.7 (High): 40.4% less intelligence, 70.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 117.5% 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 (Medium) 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 (Medium)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-medium · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/qwen3-8-27b-medium?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill