Grok 4.7 (Low) vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Low) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) 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 (Low) scores 23.8 points higher (42.2 vs 18.4) but costs 1.7× as much to run the benchmark ($1631 vs $941; both premium class). Pick Grok 4.7 (Low) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning).
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Low) | Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 42.2 | 18.4 | −56.4% Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Re… is 56.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,630.69 | $940.97 | −42.3% Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Re… is 42.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.72s | 65.15s | +412.2% Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Re… is 412.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.60 / $3.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) vs Grok 4.7 (Low): 56.4% less intelligence, 42.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 412.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.7 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Grok 4.7 (Low)Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning)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-low/qwen3-5-397b-a17b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-low/qwen3-5-397b-a17b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill