
Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot
Grok vs Grok 4.7
Snappy + real-time — the X-native model. vs Grok 4.6's price, a bigger base model, and it builds games that hold together.
Head-to-head verdict: Grok wins 6–2.
What I tested — same prompt, two models
I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to Grok and Grok 4.7, side by side, on 11 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.
Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.
Grok · Used for real-time content workflows where the model needs current X timeline context. Standalone bench scoring pending.
Grok 4.7 · Wired into the Agent OS Grok Build tab (4.7 / 4.6 / 4.5 picker, OpenRouter fallback when the CLI is signed out) and benched on twenty skill-infused game builds, each played through its full gameplay arc on a Metal GPU before the vision judge scored the played frame.
Side-by-side on 47 shared tasks
Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).
Task ↓
Grok
Grok 4.7
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Page
— not attempted —
Where Grok beat Grok 4.7
The tasks where I gave Grok a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Voxelcraft
Game
Grok 8.5
·
Grok 4.7 2.2
(+6.3)
What I saw: Minecraft-style voxel sandbox, fly + break + place, day/night cycle, hotbar. 22KB.
Dogfight
Game
Grok 8.5
·
Grok 4.7 6.3
(+2.2)
What I saw: 3D dogfight game with fighter jet, enemies, missiles + guns, sky + ground, crosshair + speed + altitude HUD. 30KB.
Doom
Game
Grok 8.5
·
Grok 4.7 6.3
(+2.2)
What I saw: Doom-style FPS with sprite enemies, gun + muzzle flash + ammo/health HUD, textures, pointer-lock mouse-look. 22KB.
Twilightvale
Game
Grok 9.5
·
Grok 4.7 8.3
(+1.2)
· winner · open world depth
What I saw: Twilight Vale — 3D open-world RPG with hand-crafted village, NPCs, combat, day/night, weather, inventory. 38KB — densest build of the bench, edges out Fusion's 32KB.
Rpg
Game
Grok 9.0
·
Grok 4.7 8.2
(+0.8)
· winner · top-down RPG
What I saw: 35KB top-down RPG with tilemap, walkable terrain, NPCs, combat, HP/MP UI, inventory. Beats Fusion's lighter 26KB attempt on density.
Where Grok 4.7 beat Grok
The tasks where I gave Grok 4.7 a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Arcade
Game
Grok 4.7 8.6
·
Grok 8.0
(+0.6)
· 3D breakout polish
What I saw: A gorgeous 3D breakout with rich lighting, gradient sky dome, gridded arena, minimap, and a polished sci-fi HUD; playtest confirms real motion (walkPx 0.23) with hull/lives/score/bricks all changing and no console errors — clearly at or above the field's best.
Flightsim
Game
Grok 4.7 8.5
·
Grok 8.0
(+0.5)
· polished flight HUD
What I saw: Strong render with a detailed 3D airport (runway, hangar, apron truck), clean chase-cam plane, and a rich professional HUD (heading tape, artificial horizon, IAS/ALT/VS gauges); playtest confirms real takeoff physics — throttle to 100, IAS ramping 55→146kt, ALT climbing 1→236m wi…
Strengths & weaknesses I logged
Grok
Strengths
- Real-time access to X timeline data — unique signal no other model has
- Snappy latency on shorter prompts
- 256K context window keeps pace with the open-weights field
Trade-offs
- 13 demos on the bench but zero have curated 0–10 verdicts yet — currently unranked
- API access is gated behind X Premium, awkward for backend agent loops
Grok 4.7
Strengths
- Averaged 6.86/10 on the same twenty skill-infused game briefs where Grok 4.6 averaged 5.63, winning 8 of the 11 head-to-heads
- Best one-shots on this run: arcade (8.6), dragonrealm (8.6), flightsim (8.5), every one played on a real GPU before scoring
- Longer reinforcement learning shows: it holds a 40-50KB single-file spec and wires the controls it advertises
- xAI's own coding numbers moved: CursorBench 4.0 46.3% (from 40.4%) and DeepSWE v1.1 71.0% (from 65.2%)
Trade-offs
- 2 of 20 builds died on load or never moved when played — crypt: hud is not a function; voxelcraft: mesh.computeBoundingSphere is not a function file:///Users/j
- Independent Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.3.2 puts it at 46, seven points behind Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 at 53
- Terminal-Bench 4.0 is the weak spot xAI reports itself: 38.0% at launch
Pricing & context — the spec sheet
| Spec | Grok | Grok 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | xAI | xAI |
| Context window | 256,000 tokens | 500,000 tokens |
| Price | Subscription via X Premium | $2 in / $6 out per M tokens |
| Pricing detail | Bundled with X (Twitter) Premium subscription — no per-token bill for end users, no individual API pricing for the chat product. | xAI's September 2026 release, priced exactly like Grok 4.6: $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output on the standard tier, $4 / $12 on the Fast tier (double the output speed). OpenRouter lists the same model at $1.60 / $4.80. |
| Release | 2026-04 | 2026-09 |
| Bench coverage | 43/47 scored · avg 8.09/10 | 11/11 scored · avg 6.86/10 |
The verdict — which should you pick?
Across 8 scored shared tasks, Grok averaged 8.50/10, beating Grok 4.7's 7.03/10 by 1.47 points. Pick Grok when the build has to ship on the first prompt and you can afford the trade-offs in the comparison below.
If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire Grok and Grok 4.7 both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — workflows that need live x / twitter context → Grok, one-shot arcade, driving and shooter builds where the whole game has to arrive in a single file → Grok 4.7. That's the same setup I run for the 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
FAQ — Grok vs Grok 4.7
Which is better, Grok or Grok 4.7?
On Goldie Bench, Grok averages 8.50/10 across the shared tasks, with 5 gold, 1 silver, 1 bronze overall. Grok 4.7 averages 7.03/10, with 0 gold, 1 silver, 2 bronze. Grok wins the head-to-head 6–2.
How much does Grok cost vs Grok 4.7?
Grok: Bundled with X (Twitter) Premium subscription — no per-token bill for end users, no individual API pricing for the chat product. Grok 4.7: xAI's September 2026 release, priced exactly like Grok 4.6: $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output on the standard tier, $4 / $12 on the Fast tier (double the output speed). OpenRouter lists the same model at $1.60 / $4.80.
What's the context window for Grok vs Grok 4.7?
Grok has a 256,000 tokens context window. Grok 4.7 has a 500,000 tokens context window.
When should I pick Grok over Grok 4.7?
Pick Grok for: Workflows that need live X / Twitter context; Snappy prompts where latency matters; Researchers comparing X-native models against the rest of the field. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: 13 demos on the bench but zero have curated 0–10 verdicts yet — currently unranked; API access is gated behind X Premium, awkward for backend agent loops.
When should I pick Grok 4.7 over Grok?
Pick Grok 4.7 for: One-shot arcade, driving and shooter builds where the whole game has to arrive in a single file; High-volume agent work priced at half what the other frontier models charge; Grok Build inside the Agent OS: pick 4.7 in the tab and everything it writes lands in the workspace. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: 2 of 20 builds died on load or never moved when played — crypt: hud is not a function; voxelcraft: mesh.computeBoundingSphere is not a function file:///Users/j; Independent Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.3.2 puts it at 46, seven points behind Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 at 53; Terminal-Bench 4.0 is the weak spot xAI reports itself: 38.0% at launch.
How does Goldie Bench score Grok vs Grok 4.7?
Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.
Related comparisons
Other head-to-heads using the same scoring system:
Grok vs Fusion Grok 4.7 vs Fusion Grok vs Claude Opus 5 Grok 4.7 vs Claude Opus 5 Grok vs Hermes MoA Grok 4.7 vs Hermes MoA Grok vs GPT-5.6 Sol Grok 4.7 vs GPT-5.6 SolFull model pages: Grok · Grok 4.7 · back to the leaderboard
The same stack Julian uses
Run this stack yourself.
Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 4,000+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
4,000+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly
































