Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.7 vs Llama 3.1-405B

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.7 xAI

46.6

Rank #56 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.4

Rank #279 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.1-405B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.7 leads 70.1 to 39.1.
  • Llama 3.1-405B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index46.630.4
Released2026-09-212024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked2142

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23), Llama 3.1-405B: 32.7 (#257)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Coding14231291
CursorBench46.3%—
LMArena WebDev1636—
FrontierSWE29.5%—
SciCode57.4%—
WeirdML—21.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.7: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 20.9 (#131)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
TheAgentCompany—7.4%
Cybench—7.5%

Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49), Llama 3.1-405B: 16.4 (#293)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Hard Prompts14091270
SimpleBench—23%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—45%
NYT Connections (extended)76.8%—
CritPt17.7%—
DTBench—61.4%
BIG-Bench Hard—82.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—128.76
ForecastBench—59.9
HellaSwag—89.2%
PIQA—85.9%
WinoGrande—89.2%

Math Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73), Llama 3.1-405B: 17.3 (#283)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Math13931281
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—9.7%
ProofBench34%—
Omni-MATH—24.9%
MATH Level 5—49.8%

Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130), Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#221)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Expert14131243
GPQA Diamond—50.9%
MMLU-Pro—72.3%
Confabulations—17.6%
GPQA (HELM)—52.2%
ARC (AI2) Challenge—95.3%
MMLU—84.5%
TriviaQA—82.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107), Llama 3.1-405B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
Furniture Assembly20.8%—

Multilingual Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108), Llama 3.1-405B: 40.9 (#209)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Non-English13921248
LMArena Chinese14761242
LMArena Russian13961265
LMArena French—1278
LMArena German—1252
LMArena Japanese—1208
LMArena Korean—1184
LMArena Spanish—1259

Instruction Following Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98), Llama 3.1-405B: 66.1 (#209)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Instruction Following14061259
IFEval—81.1%

Long Context Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97), Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#192)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Longer Query14161266

Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23), Llama 3.1-405B: 39.1 (#246)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-405B
LMArena Text13971284
LMArena Creative Writing13911262
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2007870
LMArena Multi-Turn13891297
WildBench—78.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.7 better than Llama 3.1-405B?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.7 or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 32.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Llama 3.1-405B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper