Grok 4.7 vs Qwen3.7 Max
Grok 4.7 comes out ahead, 61 to 55 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
xAIGrok 4.7
61/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $6.00
- Context500K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.7 Max
55/100- ECI153.7
- Price$2.50 / $7.50
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Grok 4.7 is our pick
Grok 4.7 is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Qwen3.7 Max (55). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen3.7 Max wins on capability and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond, FrontierMath Tiers 1–3, OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 and SimpleQA Verified), because Grok 4.7 has no Capabilities Index score yet.
- CapabilityQwen3.7 MaxShared benchmarks: Qwen3.7 Max 76.7% · Grok 4.7 74.9%
- Lowest priceGrok 4.7Grok 4.7 $3.00 · Qwen3.7 Max $3.75 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.7 Max 1,000,000 · Grok 4.7 500,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGrok 4.7Grok 4.7: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3.7 Max: Text
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityShared benchmarks | 50% | 75 | 77 |
| Price | 25% | 27 | 23 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 48 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 61/100 | 55/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Grok 4.7xAI | Qwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 153.7 |
| ECI rank | — | #37 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 92.7% (best) | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 53.0% | 64.6% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 98.1% (best) | 95.6% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | — | 77.3% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 56.0% (best) | 55.8% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.00 (best) | $2.50 |
| Output | $6.00 (best) | $7.50 |
| Cached input | $0.50 | $0.50 |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.00 (best) | $3.75 |
| Long-context rate | Over 200K: $4.00 / $12.00 | Same rate |
| Price source | Official xAI API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 500,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 500,000 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | grok-4.7 | qwen3.7-max |
| API providers | 17 | 26 (best) |
| Released | Sep 21, 2026 | May 21, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | May 2026 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Grok 4.7$32.00
- Qwen3.7 Max$40.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Grok 4.7 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Grok 4.7 is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Qwen3.7 Max (55). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen3.7 Max wins on capability and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond, FrontierMath Tiers 1–3, OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 and SimpleQA Verified), because Grok 4.7 has no Capabilities Index score yet.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Grok 4.7 is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official xAI API price). Qwen3.7 Max costs $2.50 input / $7.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.00 per million tokens for Grok 4.7 versus $3.75 for Qwen3.7 Max (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Not every model here has a Capabilities Index score, so we compare the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond, FrontierMath Tiers 1–3, OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 and SimpleQA Verified): Qwen3.7 Max 76.7% and Grok 4.7 74.9%. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Grok 4.7 92.7%, Qwen3.7 Max 90.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Qwen3.7 Max 64.6%, Grok 4.7 53.0%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Grok 4.7 98.1%, Qwen3.7 Max 95.6%; SimpleQA Verified — Grok 4.7 56.0%, Qwen3.7 Max 55.8%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Grok 4.7 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.7 Max leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Max has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 500,000 for Grok 4.7. Maximum output per response: Grok 4.7 up to 500,000, Qwen3.7 Max up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Grok 4.7 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3.7 Max accepts text. Grok 4.7 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Grok 4.7 and Qwen3.7 Max are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Grok 4.7 is the newest, released Sep 21, 2026. Qwen3.7 Max came out May 21, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Grok 4.7 May 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
