Grok 4.7 vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Grok 4.7 leads Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 46.4 to 6.7, and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs 6.0x less per output token ($1.00 vs $6.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 25 benchmarks have a result for both.
Grok 4.7 or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct: which to pick
Only Grok 4.7 has a coding score, 66.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for output tokens 6.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $6.00 per million).
- Shared results
- 25
- Grok 4.7 only
- 74
- Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct only
- 10
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Grok 4.7 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Grok 4.7
Grok 4.7 leads, 46.4 against 6.7.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Grok 4.7 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1255.
Directional only
General
Vals Index
No call
Only Grok 4.7 has a Vals Index result, 58.6%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Grok 4.7
Grok 4.7 takes 500K tokens against 33K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Grok 4.7 $0.0050, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $0.0012 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Grok 4.7 66.7 from 5 benchmarks, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Intelligence, 41.7 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Epoch Capabilities Index: Grok 4.7 154.4 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 119.5, 43.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Grok 4.7 $6.00 against Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 6.0x apart.
- Context window
- Grok 4.7 takes 500K tokens, Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct 33K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Grok 4.7 | Bars | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 4 | 0 | ||
| Math | 2 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 4 | 0 | ||
| General | 11 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 25 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | Not measured | 16.4% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 47.0% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LiveBench coding | 84.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1637 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 28.8% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 86.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 44.8% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 0.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | 57.7% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 73.4% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | 42.9% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | 69.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 29.5% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| SciCode | 57.8% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| FrontierCode | 47.6% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1432 | 1276 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1421 | 1261 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1663 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1627 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | 1586 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 46.4 | 6.7 | Grok 4.7 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.4 | 119.5 | Grok 4.7 |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | 86.4% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LiveBench browser | 60.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | 50.1% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | 3.8% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 52.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 34.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 47.1% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 18.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 67.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 69.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 10.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Vals Science Index | 34.8% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Robo-bench (Vals AI) | 0.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| APEX-Agents | 54.6% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $10,537 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 82.7% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 25.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 41.7% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 43.1% | 3.5% | Grok 4.7 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 92.7% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| ARC-AGI | 90.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.4% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 41.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 29.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1415 | 1251 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1439 | 1221 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1427 | 1269 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1254 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1309 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 98.1% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 53.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 17.1% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| ProofBench | 26.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| GSM8K | Not measured | 93.0% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1414 | 1251 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1435 | 1243 | Grok 4.7 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 84.4% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 49.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 63.5% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 56.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| MMLU | Not measured | 79.1% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| AI2 Reasoning Challenge | Not measured | 70.5% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1419 | 1221 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1395 | 1187 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1423 | 1257 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1389 | 1224 | Grok 4.7 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1255 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1275 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1314 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1238 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1274 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1273 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LiveBench design | 78.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index110
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 58.6% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | 76.9% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 65.6% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 40.8% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 89.4% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 80.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| DTBench | 96.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMCA | 49.4% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Furniture assembly | 20.8% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| HellaSwag | Not measured | 83.0% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| WinoGrande | Not measured | 80.8% | Only Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text | 1399 | 1230 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1406 | 1223 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1381 | 1174 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Vision | 1231 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1411 | 1248 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1386 | 1205 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1449 | 1222 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1366 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1359 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1383 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1431 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1406 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1399 | 1228 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1420 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1394 | 1222 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1416 | 1251 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1394 | 1191 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1376 | 1150 | Grok 4.7 |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1229 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1250 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1241 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1217 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | SpaceXAI Grok 4.7 | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | xAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | September 21, 2026 | November 11, 2024 |
| Context window | 500K | 33K |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.00 | $0.66 |
| Output $/Mtok | $6.00 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | 66.7 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 5 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for coding?
Only Grok 4.7 has a coding score, 66.7 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct for output tokens 6.0x cheaper ($1.00 vs $6.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
Grok 4.7 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $6.00 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.66 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Grok 4.7 or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
Grok 4.7, with 500K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks is the Grok 4.7 vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct comparison based on?
25 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Grok 4.7's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.