# Grok 4.7 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

> Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 7.1× 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-qwen3-6-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.7 leads 40.1 to 28.4.
- Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.6 | 38.4 |
| Rank | 56 | 176 |
| Context | 500K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.19 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $1.13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CursorBench | 46.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1636 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | — |
| SciCode | 57.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1423 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 326.4 |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 76.8% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1409 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 77.1% |
| LMCA | — | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.26 |

## Math

- Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| ProofBench | 34% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1393 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 15.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1413 | — |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 20.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1476 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1396 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | — |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1391 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2007 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 7.1× 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 Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 500K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.