Grok 4.7

GALatest Flagship

by xAI · Grok 4 family · best for frontier-class coding and knowledge-work agents at mid-tier prices

FrontierReasoningCoding
8.2
AI Panel Score
Value 8.8/10

Grok 4.7 is xAI's flagship model for coding, agentic tasks and knowledge work, announced and released to the public API on 2026-09-21 (xAI's pages now carry the SpaceXAI name). It is a reasoning-always-on model with a new, larger base model than Grok 4.6, a 500,000-token context window, text and image input, and xAI's server-side web and X search tools. xAI's own launch table puts it level with GPT-5.6 Sol on hard coding benchmarks at half Sol's input price and under a third of its output price. The sentence a buyer needs: Grok 4.7 is the most credible coding and knowledge-work model xAI has shipped, priced at $2 / $6 per 1M tokens, but on release day every performance figure is xAI's own, and it gives up Grok 4.3's 1M context and batch discount.

What's new

  • Two releases sit between Grok 4.3 and Grok 4.7. Grok 4.5 (2026-07-16) was a coding-focused model trained alongside Cursor, priced at $2 / $6 with a 500K context and $0.30 cached input, and made the default in Grok Build. Grok 4.6 (2026-08-12) focused on long-running agents, added the xhigh effort level and, by xAI's own figure, matched GPT-5.6 Sol at 61 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index. Neither has its own page in this catalog; Grok 4.7 supersedes both at the same list price and, per xAI, the same speed as Grok 4.6.
  • New, larger base model than Grok 4.6, trained with a longer reinforcement-learning run on a harder task mix weighted toward problems that take many hours. xAI says it verifies its own work better, manages long context better, and natively understands the Grok Bot harness for conversational and general knowledge work.
  • Vendor-reported gains over Grok 4.6 on xAI's launch table: Terminal-Bench 4.0 38.0% vs 20.3%, EEBench 64.0% vs 53.0%, CursorBench 4.0 46.3% vs 40.4%, DeepSWE v1.1 71.0% vs 65.2%, HealthBench Professional 56.7% vs 48.5%, AA Briefcase 1,657 vs 1,546 Elo, GDPval 1,695 vs 1,605 Elo.
  • New safeguard stack. xAI calls it its strongest model yet on refusals and jailbreak resistance (details under Safety & Governance).
  • Higher price than Grok 4.3: $2 / $6 against $1.25 / $2.50 (input up 60%, output 2.4x), cached input $0.50 against $0.20.
  • Context halved: 500K tokens against Grok 4.3's 1M.
  • No batch API: Grok 4.3 accepts Batch API requests at 20% off; Grok 4.7 does not.
  • Reasoning cannot be disabled: Grok 4.3's current docs list a none effort level and default to low; Grok 4.7 defaults to high and its lowest setting is low, so migrating removes the non-reasoning option.
  • Newer knowledge: May 2026 cutoff, against December 2025 for Grok 4.3.
  • Higher default rate limits: 150 requests per second and 50M tokens per minute, against 37 requests per second and 10M tokens per minute for Grok 4.3.
  • US regional endpoint (us.api.x.ai, 10% premium) keeps request handling, inference, moderation and retained data in the United States. The regions listed for Grok 4.7 are all in the US; Grok 4.3 also lists eu-west-1.
  • Encrypted reasoning always returned on the Responses API, to be passed back each turn.
  • Grok 4.7 Fast, the same model on faster infrastructure at twice the token price and twice the output speed, is available only in Cursor and Grok Build.

AI Panel Review

Six personas, six verdicts — the same panel that reviews every product on TopReviewed.

Decision Maker8/10
“Frontier-class coding claims at $2 in and $6 out make Grok 4.7 easy to pilot, but every headline number is still xAI's own for now.”

Grok 4.7 is the first xAI model since Grok 4.3 that belongs on a coding or knowledge-work shortlist on capability rather than price alone. xAI's own table has it level with GPT-5.6 Sol on DeepSWE and Terminal-Bench 4.0 at half Sol's input price and under a third of its output price. Governance is stronger than past Grok releases: SOC 2 Type 2, no training on API data without permission, team-wide zero data retention and a US-guaranteed endpoint. The risks are proof and churn: three flagships in about ten weeks, context halved to 500K, no batch API, no EU region listed, and no independent benchmark yet.

Strategic Fit 8Vendor Risk 7Roadmap Confidence 7.5
Pros
  • Frontier-level vendor results at mid-tier prices
  • SOC 2 Type 2 and team-wide ZDR
  • US-guaranteed endpoint
Cons
  • Vendor-only benchmarks
  • rapid version churn
  • 500K context and no batch API
Right for: Teams piloting a second coding or agent vendor against their own evals
Avoid if: You need EU processing, batch discounts or independently audited scores before committing
Domain Strategist8.5/10
“xAI has turned Grok from a real-time chat brand into a coding contender, using Cursor distribution and price as its wedge against OpenAI.”

Grok 4.5 through 4.7 repositioned xAI around coding and knowledge work. Grok 4.5 was trained alongside Cursor, Grok 4.7 is the default in Grok Build and on every Cursor plan, and xAI now benchmarks against GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5.1 rather than chat assistants. The distinctive wins in xAI's table are legal work (Harvey Legal Agent Benchmark 19.6% against 2.5% for Sol) and electrical engineering (EEBench 64.0%). Live X search is still a data moat no rival can copy. The weakness: its price lead is thin against Claude Sonnet 5 at $2 / $10 and open-weights DeepSeek V4 Pro, and the brand still worries conservative enterprise buyers.

Competitive Positioning 8.5Differentiation 8.5Market Timing 8.5
Pros
  • Cursor and Grok Build distribution
  • legal and engineering niches
  • unique live X data
Cons
  • Price lead narrowing
  • brand risk with conservative buyers
Right for: Coding-tool vendors and legal or engineering products seeking a cheaper frontier backend
Avoid if: Your buyers weigh brand conservatism or multi-cloud availability heavily
Finance Lead9/10
“At $2 in and $6 out it costs less per task than GPT-5.6 Sol, but there is no batch discount and 200K-token prompts double the whole bill.”

At $2 / $6, Grok 4.7 costs half of GPT-5.6 Sol's promotional $4 input and 30% of its $20 output, and undercuts Claude Sonnet 5's $10 output. xAI's CursorBench chart puts its average cost per task at $6.01 at xhigh, against $8.23 for Sol at max and $11.95 for Claude Opus 5 at max. Three cost traps: prompts of 200K tokens or more bill every token at $4 / $1 / $12; cached input at $0.50 is a 75% discount where Anthropic and OpenAI give 90%; and there is no batch API, while Sol and Sonnet 5 offer 50% off. X Search moved to per-post billing on launch day. DeepSeek V4 Pro stays far cheaper for text-only work.

Cost Efficiency 9Pricing Transparency 8.5Value per Dollar 9
Pros
  • Low output price for a frontier-class coder
  • lower vendor-reported cost per task than Sol or Opus 5
  • published US-endpoint and Fast-variant rates
Cons
  • No batch discount
  • shallow 75% cache discount
  • whole-request doubling at 200K prompt tokens
Right for: High-volume coding agents and knowledge-work jobs with prompts under 200K tokens
Avoid if: Your workloads are batchable or routinely exceed 200K-token prompts
Domain Practitioner8.5/10
“Drop-in OpenAI SDK support, four effort levels and X search in one call; budget for encrypted reasoning items and for the missing batch API.”

Integration is simple: set the model to grok-4.7 in the OpenAI SDK, the Vercel AI SDK or xai_sdk, on either the Responses or Chat Completions API. Function calling, structured outputs, web search, X search and code execution are all supported, and 150 requests per second with 50M tokens per minute is generous headroom. Practical details: reasoning cannot be turned off (low to xhigh, default high), the Responses API always returns encrypted reasoning that should be passed back each turn, and reliable cache hits need prompt_cache_key. Presence penalty, frequency penalty and stop sequences return errors on this reasoning model. Context compaction and WebSocket mode help long agent loops.

API Ergonomics 8.5Tool/Agent Support 9Reliability 7.5
Pros
  • OpenAI-compatible Responses and Chat Completions APIs
  • rich server-side tools
  • high default rate limits
Cons
  • No non-reasoning mode
  • no batch endpoint
  • cache hits depend on prompt_cache_key
Right for: Agent builders who want a cheaper frontier coder behind an OpenAI-style API
Avoid if: You need low-latency non-reasoning calls or batch processing
Power User8/10
“As Grok Build's default it is a strong, free-to-start coding agent, but xAI's launch post never says whether Grok app subscribers get 4.7.”

For a daily user, Grok 4.7 lives mainly in coding tools. It is the default model in Grok Build, which has a free tier, and it is on every Cursor plan, with a Fast variant at twice the output speed for those willing to pay double. xAI says it works longer on hard tasks, checks its own work, and produces better documents and presentations, with AA Briefcase and GDPval gains over Grok 4.6. Reasoning is always on, so simple questions still wait for thinking, and xhigh adds more. The launch post does not say whether the Grok consumer app or SuperGrok plans run Grok 4.7, so chat users should check before paying.

Output Quality 8.5Speed 7Everyday Usefulness 8
Pros
  • Default in free-to-start Grok Build
  • available on all Cursor plans
  • better documents and slides per xAI
Cons
  • Always-on reasoning latency
  • consumer app availability unstated
  • Fast variant costs double
Right for: Developers who work in Cursor or a terminal coding agent
Avoid if: You want quick conversational answers in a consumer chat app
Skeptic7/10
“Every Grok 4.7 number comes from xAI's launch post on release day, no independent evaluator has scored it yet, and Grok 4.6 is six weeks old.”

Treat Grok 4.7's claims as unverified. All eight capability scores on this page come from xAI's launch post, published the day the model shipped. Several use newer benchmark versions than the ones stored for older models (CursorBench 4.0, Terminal-Bench 4.0), and the safety headline rests on HackerBench, xAI's own benchmark. Even on xAI's chart it trails Claude Fable 5.1 on CursorBench, GDPval, AA Briefcase and Terminal-Bench 4.0 (57.9% against 38.0%), and trails GPT-5.6 Sol on DeepSWE and HealthBench Professional. Against Grok 4.3 there are real regressions: half the context, no batch API and higher prices.

Claim Accuracy 6.5Weakness Severity 7Hype vs Reality 7
Pros
  • Specs, prices and limits are fully documented on xAI's own pages
  • xAI's comparison tables state effort levels
Cons
  • Vendor-only benchmarks
  • nonstandard benchmark versions
  • regressions against Grok 4.3 on context, batch and price
Right for: Buyers who will run their own evals before switching
Avoid if: You make vendor decisions from launch-day charts

Strengths

  • xAI reports coding results level with GPT-5.6 Sol (DeepSWE v1.1, Terminal-Bench 4.0) and ahead of it on CursorBench 4.0, at $2 / $6 against Sol's $4 / $20.
  • Lowest average cost per task among the frontier models on xAI's CursorBench 4.0 chart: $6.01 at xhigh against $8.23 for Sol at max and $11.95 for Claude Opus 5 at max.
  • Strong vendor-reported domain results: Harvey Legal Agent Benchmark 19.6% (Sol 2.5%) and EEBench 64.0% (Sol 39.4%).
  • Native X search plus web search and code execution as server-side tools.
  • API data governance is clearer than past Grok releases: no training without permission, SOC 2 Type 2, team-wide ZDR, and a US-guaranteed endpoint.
  • High default rate limits (150 requests/second, 50M tokens/minute) and OpenAI-SDK compatibility.

Limitations

  • Every performance figure is vendor-reported from launch day; no independent evaluation had been published at verification time.
  • 500K context, half of Grok 4.3's and of the 1M-class windows at OpenAI, Anthropic and Google.
  • No Batch API, where GPT-5.6 Sol, Claude Sonnet 5 and Gemini offer 50% batch discounts.
  • Prompts of 200K tokens or more bill every token at double rates.
  • Cached input discount is 75%, shallower than the 90% at Anthropic and OpenAI.
  • Reasoning cannot be disabled, so there is no cheap, fast non-reasoning mode.
  • Only US regions listed; no EU processing option.
  • Trails Claude Fable 5.1 on CursorBench, Terminal-Bench 4.0, GDPval and AA Briefcase, and trails GPT-5.6 Sol on DeepSWE and HealthBench Professional, even on xAI's own chart.
  • Three xAI flagships in about ten weeks (Grok 4.5, 4.6, 4.7) means frequent migration decisions.

Best use cases

  • Cost-sensitive coding agents. Teams running agents in Cursor, Grok Build or their own harness get vendor-reported GPT-5.6 Sol-class coding at under a third of Sol's output price.
  • Multi-hour knowledge work. Document, spreadsheet and presentation tasks where xAI's AA Briefcase and GDPval results put it near the top, such as analyst-style research or report assembly.
  • Legal and engineering assistants. Its vendor-reported leads on the Harvey Legal Agent Benchmark and EEBench make it a candidate for legal-workflow and electrical-engineering tools, pending your own evals.
  • Real-time research agents. X search plus web search in the same agent loop, for social listening, market monitoring and breaking-news work, now priced per post fetched.
  • US-resident inference. Teams that need US-only request handling and inference can use the US endpoint for a 10% premium.

Deep dive

The full research notes behind this review — verified against primary sources.

Architecture

xAI discloses that Grok 4.7 uses "a new, larger base model" than Grok 4.6 and a longer reinforcement-learning run on harder, multi-hour tasks. Everything else is undisclosed: architecture type, total and active parameters, expert count, layers, attention mechanism, training tokens and compute. The field is marked unknown rather than assuming a mixture-of-experts design. For context, xAI said Grok 4.5 was trained across tens of thousands of NVIDIA GB300 GPUs in its Memphis data centers, with reinforcement learning over hundreds of thousands of tasks; it has not said how much of that carries into Grok 4.7. Documented behavior: a 500K-token input context, always-on reasoning with four effort levels, summarized reasoning output plus encrypted reasoning content on the Responses API, text and image input, and a May 2026 knowledge cutoff. Like Anthropic, OpenAI and Google, xAI keeps its frontier internals closed.

Capabilities

Scores below lean on xAI's own launch figures, which no independent evaluator had reproduced at verification time. They are set conservatively for that reason.

  • Coding (8.8): xAI reports CursorBench 4.0 46.3% at xhigh (Claude Opus 5 at max 46.6%, GPT-5.6 Sol at max 41.7%, Claude Fable 5.1 at max 51.8%), DeepSWE v1.1 71.0% at high (Sol 72.7%, Fable 5.1 70.0%) and Terminal-Bench 4.0 38.0% (Sol 37.3%, Fable 5.1 57.9%). That places it with GPT-5.6 Sol and below Fable 5.1, a large step up from Grok 4.3's 6.5. It is the default model in Grok Build.
  • Reasoning (8.5): No GPQA, HLE or AIME figure has been published. HealthBench Professional 56.7% trails Sol (60.5%) and Fable 5.1 (62.1%); EEBench 64.0% beats both. Scored on the strength of the professional-task results, held below the coding score for lack of standard reasoning data.
  • Math (8.0): No math benchmark published for Grok 4.7. Held at Grok 4.3's level until one appears.
  • Agentic / tool use (9.0): The main pitch. Training weighted toward multi-hour tasks, xAI's AA Briefcase figure of 1,657 Elo for multi-hour office work (second to Fable 5.1's 1,678 on xAI's chart), GDPval 1,695 Elo, and Terminal-Bench 4.0 level with Sol. Context compaction and WebSocket mode support long agent loops.
  • Long context (7.5): 500K tokens is half Grok 4.3's 1M and half the 1M-class windows of GPT-5.6 Sol, Claude Sonnet 5 and Gemini. xAI says long-context management improved, but no long-context benchmark was published, and prompts of 200K tokens or more double the price of the whole request.
  • Multilingual (6.5): No multilingual data published.
  • Vision / document OCR (6.5 / 6.5): Image input (jpg and png, up to 20 MiB, no image-count limit) with no published vision benchmark. xAI reports better document and presentation creation, which is output quality, not OCR.
  • Creative writing (7.0): No data. xAI's emphasis is on documents, slides and professional artifacts rather than fiction.
  • Instruction following (8.0): No IFEval or IFBench figure. Scored on Grok 4.3's baseline.
  • Function calling (8.5): Function calling and structured outputs on both the Responses and Chat Completions APIs, plus server-side web search, X search and code execution tools.
  • Safety calibration (7.0): xAI reports a new safeguard stack: 3.3% of risky dual-use cyber prompts allowed through on its own HackerBench v0.3, and a leading 62.4% on LatchBio's biosafety benchmark. That is a clear improvement in xAI's own framing over Grok 4.3's 5.5, but none of it has been independently reproduced.
  • Real-time data (10): Native X search (posts, profiles, threads) and web search as server-side tools. No rival has first-party access to the live X corpus. Real-time access requires enabling those tools; without them the model knows only its training data.

Benchmark analysis

All scores in this table are vendor-reported by xAI in its 2026-09-21 launch post. Grok 4.7 figures are at xhigh effort unless noted; competitor figures are as charted by xAI.

Benchmark Score vs Predecessor vs Top Competitor Source
CursorBench 4.0 (long-running coding) 46.3% +5.9 vs Grok 4.6 (40.4%) GPT-5.6 Sol max 41.7%; Claude Opus 5 max 46.6%; Claude Fable 5.1 max 51.8%; Claude Sonnet 5 max 34.1% xAI (vendor-reported)
DeepSWE v1.1 (high effort) 71.0% +5.8 vs Grok 4.6 (65.2%) GPT-5.6 Sol 72.7%; Claude Fable 5.1 70.0% xAI (vendor-reported)
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (multi-hour terminal work) 38.0% +17.7 vs Grok 4.6 (20.3%) GPT-5.6 Sol 37.3%; Claude Fable 5.1 57.9% xAI (vendor-reported)
EEBench (electrical engineering) 64.0% +11.0 vs Grok 4.6 (53.0%) GPT-6 Astra 69.3%; Claude Fable 5.1 56.4%; GPT-5.6 Sol 39.4% xAI (vendor-reported)
AA Briefcase v1.1 (multi-hour office work, Elo) 1,657 +111 vs Grok 4.6 (1,546) Claude Fable 5.1 1,678; GPT-6 Astra 1,569; GPT-5.6 Sol 1,487 xAI (vendor-reported)
GDPval (professional knowledge work, Elo) 1,695 +90 vs Grok 4.6 (1,605) Claude Fable 5.1 1,735; GPT-6 Astra 1,542 xAI (vendor-reported)
Harvey Legal Agent Benchmark 19.6% +3.8 vs Grok 4.6 (15.8%) Claude Fable 5.1 6.7%; GPT-5.6 Sol 2.5% xAI (vendor-reported)
HealthBench Professional 56.7% +8.2 vs Grok 4.6 (48.5%) GPT-5.6 Sol 60.5%; Claude Fable 5.1 62.1% xAI (vendor-reported)

Grok 4.3, the previous model in this catalog, has no scores on these benchmark versions, so the predecessor column compares against Grok 4.6 from the same xAI table. None of these results fills the catalog's standard compare fields. xAI published no MMLU-Pro, GPQA Diamond, AIME, SWE-bench Verified, LiveCodeBench, MMMU, HLE or LMArena figure for Grok 4.7. Its Terminal-Bench result is on version 4.0, a harder revision than the Terminal-Bench 2.x scores stored for other models, so that compare field stays empty rather than mixing versions. The GDPval and AA Briefcase Elo values also differ from the GDPval-AA v2 and AA-Briefcase values in xAI's Grok 4.6 post, so compare them only within the same chart. No independent evaluator had published a verifiable Grok 4.7 result at verification time.

Speed & latency

No independent throughput or time-to-first-token measurement of Grok 4.7 existed at verification time, so both fields are null. xAI says Grok 4.7 is served at the same speed as Grok 4.6, and its launch tagline claims it is "twice as fast" as comparable models. In July xAI stated Grok 4.5 ran at about 80 tokens per second. Three things shape real latency. Reasoning is always on and defaults to high, so even simple requests spend time thinking; low is the fastest setting, and xhigh adds latency for the hardest work. xAI's code samples set one-hour client timeouts for reasoning requests. Grok 4.7 Fast doubles output speed at double the price, but only inside Cursor and Grok Build. On the API, Priority Processing buys higher scheduling priority at 2x token rates. Long agent loops can use context compaction and WebSocket mode to cut time-to-first-token and round-trip overhead.

Pricing analysis

Surface Cost Notes
API input $2.00 / 1M tok $4.00 once the prompt reaches 200K tokens, applied to every token in that request
API output $6.00 / 1M tok $12.00 at 200K+ prompt tokens; reasoning tokens are billed
Cached input $0.50 / 1M tok 75% off input; $1.00 at 200K+; set prompt_cache_key for reliable hits
Batch (in/out) n/a Batch API not supported
Image input token-based No per-image price
US regional endpoint 1.1x $2.20 / $0.55 / $6.60 (input / cached / output) below 200K
Priority Processing 2x standard rates Billed only when the response confirms priority tier
Grok 4.7 Fast $4.00 / $1.00 / $12.00 Input / cached / output; Cursor and Grok Build only; $6 / $1.50 / $18 above 200K
Server-side tools $5 / 1K calls Web search and code execution; X Search is $5 per 1K posts and $10 per 1K profiles fetched from 2026-09-21 12:00 PT
Direct UI Grok Build; Cursor plans Default model in Grok Build; on all Cursor plans; the launch post does not name grok.com or SuperGrok
Free tier Grok Build free tier Standard Grok 4.7 only; Fast variant excluded
Rate limits 150 req/s · 50M TPM Per xAI's model page

Requests blocked before generation for usage-guideline violations on the Responses API carry a $0.05 fee; requests flagged after generation are billed normally.

Deployment & access

Proprietary and API-only: no open weights, no self-hosting. The xAI API serves Grok 4.7 through the Responses and Chat Completions endpoints at api.x.ai/v1, with the native xai_sdk, the OpenAI SDK and the Vercel AI SDK all documented. The global endpoint may route between regions. The US regional endpoint (us.api.x.ai/v1, 10% premium) guarantees US handling, inference, moderation and retained data, but Files, Collections and server-side tools (web search, X search, code execution) fall outside that guarantee. xAI lists Grok 4.7's regions as us-east-1, us-west-2 and us-central-1, with no EU region. Beyond the API it runs as the default model in Grok Build (xAI's coding agent CLI), on all Cursor plans, and through the OpenRouter, Vercel and Cloudflare gateways. xAI's pages do not confirm Amazon Bedrock, Google Vertex AI or Microsoft Foundry availability for Grok 4.7.

Safety & privacy

  • Safeguards (vendor-reported): Grok 4.7 ships an "entirely new safeguard stack". xAI says it is the strongest model it has tested on refusals and jailbreak resistance, tops LatchBio's biosafety benchmark at 62.4%, and lets through only 3.3% of risky dual-use prompts on HackerBench v0.3, xAI's own cyber-risk benchmark, while rarely blocking legitimate security work. Select cybersecurity partners get invite-only access to its red-team capabilities. No named safety framework or capability tier is published alongside the model.
  • Training on inputs: xAI states it never trains on API inputs or outputs without explicit permission. By default, API requests and responses are kept encrypted for 30 days for abuse auditing, then deleted.
  • Zero Data Retention: available as a team-wide setting. It disables the stateful Responses API, Files, Collections, the Batch API and deferred completions. On the Responses API, Grok 4.7 always returns encrypted reasoning, and xAI notes this default does not stop it storing the reasoning trace server-side for rehydration.
  • Compliance: xAI states it is SOC 2 Type 2 compliant, with details in its Trust Center under NDA. A HIPAA Business Associate Agreement is available through a questionnaire. No GDPR-specific certification is stated, and no EU region is listed for Grok 4.7.
  • Consumer surfaces: Grok Build asks users whether xAI may retain data to improve the product and model, and code-data retention can be turned off in its privacy settings. Build-mode sessions on grok.com may be used for training if the "improve the model" toggle is on.

Ecosystem & tooling

Official SDKs cover Python (xai_sdk) and TypeScript through the Vercel AI SDK's @ai-sdk/xai provider, and the OpenAI SDK works against api.x.ai/v1 for both Responses and Chat Completions. Grok 4.7 is the default model in Grok Build, xAI's coding agent (TUI, headless CLI and Agent Client Protocol), and is available on all Cursor plans. Model gateways OpenRouter, Vercel and Cloudflare serve it. xAI trained it to understand the harness of Grok Bot, its persistent cloud agent product. Popularity is growing: Cursor distribution gives it a large developer audience, while enterprise penetration still trails OpenAI, Anthropic and Google.

Buyer questions

How much does Grok 4.7 cost?

$2.00 per 1M input tokens, $6.00 per 1M output tokens and $0.50 per 1M cached input tokens. Once a prompt reaches 200K tokens, every token in that request bills at $4 / $1 / $12. There is no batch discount; the US regional endpoint adds 10% and Priority Processing doubles rates.

Is Grok 4.7 good for coding?

On xAI's own figures, yes: CursorBench 4.0 46.3%, DeepSWE v1.1 71.0% and Terminal-Bench 4.0 38.0%, roughly level with GPT-5.6 Sol and below Claude Fable 5.1. These are vendor-reported launch-day numbers, so run your own repository-level evals before switching.

Should I move from Grok 4.3?

Move for capability: Grok 4.7 is a new, larger model built for coding and agents. Stay on Grok 4.3 if you rely on its 1M context, its 20%-off Batch API, its non-reasoning none effort level, EU processing, or its lower $1.25 / $2.50 price.

Does xAI train on my API data?

xAI states it never trains on API inputs or outputs without explicit permission. Requests are retained encrypted for 30 days for abuse auditing unless you enable team-wide Zero Data Retention, which also disables stateful Responses, Files, Collections and the Batch API.

Can I keep processing in the US or EU?

The US regional endpoint guarantees US handling, inference, moderation and retained data for a 10% premium, excluding Files, Collections and server-side tools. xAI lists no EU region for Grok 4.7.

What is Grok 4.7 Fast?

The same model on faster infrastructure with twice the output speed at twice the token price ($4 / $12). It is available only in Cursor and Grok Build, not on the public API or Grok Build's free tier.

How does it compare with DeepSeek V4 Pro on price?

DeepSeek V4 Pro costs $1.32 / $3.96 at peak and half that off-peak, with a 1M context and open weights under MIT, but it is text-only. Grok 4.7 adds image input, native X and web search, and xAI-reported coding results against GPT-5.6 Sol.

Is real-time X data included?

Only when you enable the X Search or Web Search tools; without them the model knows nothing after its May 2026 cutoff. From 2026-09-21 X Search bills $5 per 1K posts and $10 per 1K profiles fetched.

Comparable models

GPT-5.6 Sol — OpenAI

On xAI's own table Sol at max effort roughly ties Grok 4.7 on DeepSWE v1.1 (72.7% vs 71.0%) and Terminal-Bench 4.0 (37.3% vs 38.0%), trails on CursorBench 4.0 (41.7% vs 46.3%) and leads on HealthBench Professional (60.5% vs 56.7%). Sol wins on context (1.05M), a documented 128K max output, a 50%-off batch API, a 90% cache discount and far deeper independent evaluation. It loses on price: $4 / $20 (promotional through at least 2026-11-21) against $2 / $6.

Claude Sonnet 5 — Anthropic

Same $2 input price but $10 output, with a 1M context, 128K max output, 50% batch discount, 90%-off cache reads, and availability on Bedrock, Google Cloud and Microsoft Foundry. Sonnet wins on context, cloud reach and governance maturity. On xAI's CursorBench 4.0 chart Sonnet 5 at max scores 34.1% at $7.17 per task against Grok 4.7's 46.3% at $6.01, a vendor-reported coding and cost-per-task edge for Grok.

Gemini 3.1 Pro — Google

Same $2 input price, $12 output, a 1M context and native text, image, video, audio and PDF input. It wins on context, multimodal breadth and batch pricing, but is still in preview. Grok 4.7 is GA, half the output price, and has native X search. Google's GA Gemini 3.8 Flash ($0.75 / $3.75 through 2026-12-31) is the cheaper option for high-volume agent work.

Sources

Primary references used to verify this review.

Model specs

Input price
$2 / Mtok
Output price
$6 / Mtok
Cached input
$0.50 / Mtok
Batch (in/out)
—
Context window
500K tokens
Max output
— tokens
Knowledge cutoff
2026-05
Released
2026-09-21
Modalities
text, image → text
Output speed
Not profiled
License
Proprietary
Clouds
First-party API

Does not train on API inputs by default

Last verified 2026-09-21