Model comparison
GPT-4.1 nano vs Grok 4.7
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.7 in 9 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.7 leads 40.1 to 8.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 25.9% for GPT-4.1 nano and 57.4% for Grok 4.7.
- GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 500K.
Side by side
| GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 27.7 | 46.6 |
| Released | 2025-04-14 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 500K |
| Max output | 33K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 23.8 (#325), Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 25.9% | 57.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | 1423 |
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | — |
| CursorBench | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1636 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 29.5% |
| WeirdML | 19% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.3 (#98), Grok 4.7: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 8.6 (#344), Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 17.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | 1409 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 76.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LMCA | 5.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | — |
Math Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 25.5 (#246), Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1274 | 1393 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 34% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#268), Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | 1413 |
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
Multimodal Too close to call
GPT-4.1 nano: 28.6 (#108), Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20.8% |
Multilingual Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 41.8 (#200), Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | 1476 |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1288 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1199 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 68.0 (#188), Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | 1406 |
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#291), Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | 1416 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 40.7 (#238), Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | 1391 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | 2007 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | 1389 |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Grok 4.7?
GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.
Is GPT-4.1 nano or Grok 4.7 better for coding?
Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 23.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 500K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Grok 4.7 share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.7 has 21.