Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) scores 16.9 points higher (46.4 vs 29.5) but costs 2.2× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $2277; both flagship class). Pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.7 Max.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.4 | 29.5 | −36.4% Qwen3.7 Max is 36.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,967.35 | $2,277.12 | −54.2% Qwen3.7 Max is 54.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 40.07s | 16.67s | −58.4% Qwen3.7 Max is 58.4% 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 (Xhigh): 36.4% less intelligence, 54.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 58.4% 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.
- Qwen3.7 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 (Xhigh)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/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill