ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.7 Max vs Grok 4.7

Grok 4.7 comes out ahead, 61 to 55 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Max

    Released May 21, 2026

    55/100
    • ECI153.7
    • Price$2.50 / $7.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Max
  2. Our pick

    xAI

    Grok 4.7

    Released Sep 21, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context500K
    Full specs Remove Grok 4.7

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

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 4.7Qwen3.7 Max: Text · Grok 4.7: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.7 MaxGrok 4.7
CapabilityShared benchmarks50%7775
Price25%2327
Inputs & features15%3580
Context window10%6048
Overall100%55/10061/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3.7 Max vs Grok 4.7 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen)Grok 4.7xAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)153.7—
ECI rank#37 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions90.9%92.7% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics64.6% (best)53.0%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics95.6%98.1% (best)
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues77.3%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions55.8%56.0% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$2.50$2.00 (best)
Output$7.50$6.00 (best)
Cached input$0.50$0.50
Blended (3:1)$3.75$3.00 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateOver 200K: $4.00 / $12.00
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial xAI API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)500,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens500,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high · xhigh
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDqwen3.7-maxgrok-4.7
API providers26 (best)17
ReleasedMay 21, 2026Sep 21, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—May 2026
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3.7 Max$40.00
  • Grok 4.7$32.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.7 Max or Grok 4.7?

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, Qwen3.7 Max or Grok 4.7?

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: Qwen3.7 Max up to 65,536, Grok 4.7 up to 500,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.7 Max accepts text; Grok 4.7 accepts text, images and PDFs. Grok 4.7 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Qwen3.7 Max and Grok 4.7 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons