# Grok 4.7 vs Qwen Plus

> Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Plus costs 5.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-7-vs-qwen-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 16

## Summary

- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Plus in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.7 leads 62.8 to 27.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.1% for Grok 4.7 and 17.8% for Qwen Plus.
- Qwen Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 53.1 | 37.1 |
| Rank | 37 | 210 |
| Context | 500K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18)
- Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | 1328 |
| FrontierCode | 47.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 46.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1639 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | — |
| SciCode | 57.8% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37)
- Qwen Plus: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 54.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 22.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,537 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40)
- Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1413 | 1317 |
| DTBench | 96% | 81.1% |
| LMCA | 49.4% | 24% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 76.8% | — |
| CritPt | 18% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 38% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 29% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.53 | — |

## Math

- Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39)
- Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.1% | 17.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1407 | 1326 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 53% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 34% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22)
- Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 92.7% | 48.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1422 | 1328 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 56% | — |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87)
- Qwen Plus: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1228 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 32.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 20.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116)
- Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1389 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | 1347 |
| LMArena Russian | 1397 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1455 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1251 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1400 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105)
- Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1303 |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104)
- Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1413 | 1324 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24)
- Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1399 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1391 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1393 | 1336 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2007 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen Plus?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Plus costs 5.0× 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 Qwen Plus?

Qwen Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

### Is Grok 4.7 or Qwen Plus better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 500K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Qwen Plus share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.