Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Grok 4.7
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.1 to 46.6 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.7 costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Grok 4.7 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads 51.6 to 38.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 3.1% for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and 17.7% for Grok 4.7.
- Grok 4.7 is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.6.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 50.1 | 46.6 |
| Released | 2026-02-17 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 500K |
| Max output | 128K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $3 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $15 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 57 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.7 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.0 (#62), Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1521 | 1636 |
| SciCode | 46.8% | 57.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1423 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.2% | — |
| DeepSWE | 29.9% | — |
| FrontierCode | 24.3% | — |
| CursorBench | — | 46.3% |
| FrontierSWE | — | 29.5% |
| WeirdML | 66.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,327 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 39.1 (#26), Grok 4.7: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 53.4% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 43% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 9.3% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54.9% | — |
| OSWorld | 72.1% | — |
| ExploitBench | 23.6% | — |
| GBAEval | 48.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 18% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1221 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 7,204 | — |
Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.1 (#40), Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80.9% | 76.8% |
| CritPt | 3.1% | 17.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1409 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 60.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 13% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 76.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 16% | — |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 46.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.25 | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
Math Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 51.9 (#41), Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 45% | 34% |
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1393 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 85.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 32.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 8.3% | — |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 51.6 (#60), Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1500 | 1413 |
| GPQA Diamond | 87.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 35.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.6% | — |
Multimodal Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 38.0 (#61), Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1283 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 6.7% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20.8% |
| LMArena Document | 1482 | — |
Multilingual Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 54.6 (#39), Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1491 | 1476 |
| LMArena Russian | 1440 | 1396 |
| LMArena French | 1465 | — |
| LMArena German | 1428 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1419 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1465 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 77.6 (#23), Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1406 |
Long Context Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 45.3 (#40), Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1416 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 70.4 (#22), Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1435 | 1391 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1810 | 2007 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | 1389 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1207 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 better than Grok 4.7?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.1 to 46.6 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.7 costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.6 lists at $3 and $15.
Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Grok 4.7 better for coding?
Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 46.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 does, with 1M tokens against 500K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Grok 4.7 share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.6 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 21.