Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.5 122B A10B (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 (Xhigh) scores 30.8 points higher (46.4 vs 15.6) but costs 7.5× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $661; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 15.6, and Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) when 15.6 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.4 | 15.6 | −66.4% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 66.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,967.35 | $661.29 | −86.7% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 86.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 49.93s | 21.36s | −57.2% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 57.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.40 / $3.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) vs Grok 4.7 (Xhigh): 66.4% less intelligence, 86.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 57.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- 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.
- Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)Qwen3.5 122B A10B (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/qwen3-5-122b-a10b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7/qwen3-5-122b-a10b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill