Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.7 vs Llama 3.1-70B

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 7.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.7 xAI

53.1

Rank #37 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-70B Meta

29.6

Rank #308 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.7 leads 57.8 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.1% for Grok 4.7 and 3.6% for Llama 3.1-70B.
  • Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper at $0.40 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
  • Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 128K.
  • Llama 3.1-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index53.129.6
Released2026-09-212024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K128K
Max output500K4K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$6$0.40
Results tracked3935

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), Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
LMArena Coding14271260
FrontierCode47.6%—
CursorBench46.3%—
LMArena WebDev1639—
FrontierSWE29.5%—
SciCode57.8%—
WeirdML—9%
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.1%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.8%

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37), Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
APEX-Agents54.6%—
TheAgentCompany—6.9%
BALROG—27.9%
GDP.pdf22.8%—
Vending-Bench 210,537—

Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40), Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
LMArena Hard Prompts14131241
DTBench96%60%
LMCA49.4%14.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index153.53125.92
NYT Connections (extended)76.8%—
CritPt18%—
Chess Puzzles38%—
Mystery Game Puzzles29%—

Math Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39), Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.1%3.6%
LMArena Math14071252
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)53%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
ProofBench34%—
Omni-MATH—21%
MATH Level 5—36.7%

Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
GPQA Diamond92.7%44.2%
LMArena Expert14221209
SimpleQA Verified56%—
MMLU-Pro—65.3%
GPQA (HELM)—42.6%
MMLU—80.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87), Llama 3.1-70B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
LMArena Vision1228—
Blueprint-Bench 232.5%—
Furniture Assembly20.8%—

Multilingual Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116), Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
LMArena Non-English13891219
LMArena Chinese14551215
LMArena French14551261
LMArena Russian13971234
LMArena Spanish14001253
LMArena German—1222
LMArena Japanese—1132
LMArena Korean—1140

Instruction Following Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105), Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
LMArena Instruction Following14041231
IFEval—82.1%

Long Context Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104), Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
LMArena Longer Query14131241

Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24), Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 3.1-70B
LMArena Text13991261
LMArena Creative Writing13911232
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2007784
LMArena Multi-Turn13931256
WildBench—75.8%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.7 better than Llama 3.1-70B?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 7.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 or Llama 3.1-70B?

Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

Is Grok 4.7 or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 30.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Llama 3.1-70B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 39 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.

Related comparisons

Go deeper