Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.8 27B (Non-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 26.2 points higher (46.4 vs 20.2) but costs 2.2× as much to run the benchmark ($4438 vs $2022; both flagship class). Pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning).
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.4 | 20.2 | −56.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reas… is 56.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,438.03 | $2,022.49 | −54.4% Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reas… is 54.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 81.64s | 14.28s | −82.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reas… is 82.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) vs Grok 4.7 (Xhigh): 56.5% less intelligence, 54.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 82.5% 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.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) 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 (Non-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/qwen3-8-27b-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7/qwen3-8-27b-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill