Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Medium)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) 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 (Xhigh) scores 18.8 points higher (46.4 vs 27.6) but costs 4.3× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $1165; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 27.6, and Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) when 27.6 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.4 | 27.6 | −40.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 40.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,967.35 | $1,165.00 | −76.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 76.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 40.31s | 55.12s | +36.7% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 36.7% 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 (Xhigh): 40.5% less intelligence, 76.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 36.7% slower 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.
- Qwen3.8 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 (Xhigh)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/qwen3-8-27b-medium · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7/qwen3-8-27b-medium?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill