Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.7 vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 53.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.7 xAI

53.1

Rank #37 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 7 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 57.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 17.1% for Grok 4.7 and 46.3% for Qwen3.8 Max.
  • Both cost about the same: $2 input and $6 output per million tokens.
  • Qwen3.8 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.

Side by side

Grok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index53.156.8
Released2026-09-212026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window500K1M
Max output500K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2$2
Output $ / M tokens$6$6
Results tracked3939

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena WebDev16391674
FrontierSWE29.5%17.8%
SciCode57.8%53.2%
LMArena Coding14271502
DeepSWE—57.5%
FrontierCode47.6%—
CursorBench46.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 Max leads

Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents54.6%63.3%
GDP.pdf22.8%23.2%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
Vending-Bench 210,537—

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
NYT Connections (extended)76.8%88.3%
CritPt18%20%
Chess Puzzles38%40%
LMArena Hard Prompts14131496
Mystery Game Puzzles29%38%
DTBench96%92%
LMCA49.4%46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index153.53156.41

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)53%74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.1%100%
ProofBench34%58%
LMArena Math14071499

Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
GPQA Diamond92.7%92.7%
SimpleQA Verified56%47.3%
LMArena Expert14221507

Multimodal Qwen3.8 Max leads

Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87), Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision12281314
Furniture Assembly20.8%20%
Blueprint-Bench 232.5%—

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English13891472
LMArena Chinese14551538
LMArena French14551503
LMArena Russian13971481
LMArena Spanish14001492
LMArena German—1483
LMArena Japanese—1467
LMArena Korean—1461

Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads

Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14041479

Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads

Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query14131489

Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text13991483
LMArena Creative Writing13911479
LMArena Multi-Turn13931489
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2007—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 53.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

Is Grok 4.7 or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 53.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.8 Max does, with 1M tokens against 500K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Qwen3.8 Max share?

34 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper