Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.8 Max (0902) 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 1.0 points higher (46.4 vs 45.4) but costs 1.0× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $4935; both flagship class). Pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 Max (0902).
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.4 | 45.4 | −2.2% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 2.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,967.35 | $4,934.79 | −0.7% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 0.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 45.88s | 64.02s | +39.5% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 39.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) vs Grok 4.7 (Xhigh): 2.2% less intelligence, 0.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 39.5% 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 Max (0902) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Today'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/qwen3-8-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7/qwen3-8-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill