Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.7 vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 46.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.7 xAI

46.6

Rank #56 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

51.1

Rank #36 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 57.6 to 38.7.
  • Both cost about the same: $2 input and $6 output per million tokens.
  • Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 262K.

Side by side

Grok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index46.651.1
Released2026-09-212026-04-20
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window500K262K
Max output500K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2$1.30
Output $ / M tokens$6$7.80
Results tracked2129

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), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.6 (#50)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena WebDev16361482
LMArena Coding14231472
SWE-bench Verified—76.7%
CursorBench46.3%—
FrontierSWE29.5%—
SciCode57.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.7: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Vending-Bench 2—4,254

Reasoning Too close to call

Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 40.8 (#47)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
NYT Connections (extended)76.8%74.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts14091457
SimpleBench—63%
CritPt17.7%—
Chess Puzzles—20%
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—87.2%
LMCA—42.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index—149.27

Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 52.2 (#40)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Math13931465
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
ProofBench34%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—23.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—4.2%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#35)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Expert14131476
GPQA Diamond—87.4%
SimpleQA Verified—52%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Furniture Assembly20.8%—

Multilingual Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.3 (#46)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English13921436
LMArena Chinese14761487
LMArena Russian13961444
LMArena French—1449
LMArena Spanish—1452

Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.8 (#51)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following14061437

Long Context Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#59)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query14161457

Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 64.0 (#58)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Qwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Text13971447
LMArena Creative Writing13911435
LMArena Multi-Turn13891456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2007—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 46.6 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is cheaper. It lists at $1.30 per million input tokens and $7.80 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

Is Grok 4.7 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 48.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper