Quick answer: Grok 4.7 came out on September 21, 2026, at exactly Grok 4.6's price: $2 per million input tokens, $6 per million output. It is a real but small step up. xAI's own coding scores rise 6 to 17 points, and Artificial Analysis moves its overall index just 2.
xAI launched it in Cursor, Grok Build and the API. The launch page never mentions the Grok app or SuperGrok.
My verdict after running it in Grok Build: same price, slightly better, a minor update. And the first job I gave it failed.
My read on Grok 4.7: cheap per token, hungry per job, third in agentic coding by its own founder's count.
Published September 22, 2026, the day after launch. Prices, benchmarks and availability were checked on xAI's, GitHub's and Artificial Analysis's own pages that day.
Grok 4.7 at a glance: same price, small step upQuestion
AnswerRelease date
September 21, 2026 (xAI's launch post)Price
$2 in / $6 out per 1M tokens, same as 4.6Context window
500,000 tokens (xAI's docs)Real step up from 4.6?
Small. Coding scores up 6 to 17 points; overall index up 2Where xAI launched it
Cursor, Grok Build, the Grok API, coding tools, model routers, clouds; GitHub Copilot rolling outIn the Grok app / SuperGrok?
Not on xAI's launch list. Signed out, grok.com's picker shows modes, not model numbersGrok 4.7 Fast
Same model, twice the speed, twice the price; Cursor and Grok Build onlyMy verdict
"Same price, slightly better." A minor updatexAI's launch page, captured September 22, 2026. The last line is the one that matters for your bill: "Served at the same price and speed as Grok 4.6."
Grok 4.7 shipped to Build, Cursor and the API first
Here is where xAI says Grok 4.7 runs, word for word from the launch post: "Grok 4.7 is available today in Cursor and Grok Build. It is also available through the Grok API, third-party coding harnesses, and model routers and cloud platforms."
Read that list again. There is no Grok app in it, no grok.com, no SuperGrok, no Heavy.Surface
Has Grok 4.7?
SourceGrok Build (coding agent)
Yes, the default model per xAI's docs; chat-window Build mode showed 4.7 on my account
xAI's launch post and docsCursor
Yes, on all Cursor plans
xAI's docsGrok API
Yes, model id grok-4.7
xAI's docsOpenRouter, Vercel, Cloudflare
Yes
xAI's docsGitHub Copilot
Rolling out gradually, paid plans only
GitHub's changelogGrok app chat (grok.com, SuperGrok, Heavy)
Not listed. The signed-out picker shows no model numbers
xAI's launch post; screenshot belowGrok Bot
Unknown. It will not say which model it runs
Grok Bot itself, see belowgrok.com signed out, September 22, 2026, the day after launch. This is the public page, not my SuperGrok account. The picker offers modes, not models, and nothing here says 4.6 or 4.7.
GitHub's wording is "Rollout will be gradual," for Copilot Pro, Pro+, Max, Business and Enterprise. So if your Copilot picker does not show it yet, that is expected.
Grok 4.7 Fast is the one to watch on your plan. Per xAI's docs it is "the same model served on faster infrastructure, billed at twice the standard token rates," it lives only in Cursor and Grok Build, and "it is not included in Grok Build's free tier."
My first job for Grok 4.7 in Build failed
I have been running Grok 4.7 in Grok Build. We confirmed the 4.7 label in Build, so that is the one surface where I know which model I am on.
The first thing I tried was having Grok Build make an app, or a script, to help me find good business ideas. Just to test it. It failed.
For what it is worth, this is something Codex flunked too, earlier. So 4.7 did not clear a bar that Codex had already missed.
That is honestly all I have tested it on so far. We have been building, or at least failed to build, and that is the whole field test. There is no log of that run on my machines, so I am not going to describe the error or pretend I timed it.
If Build mode itself is new to you, start with what Grok Build actually is. If you are choosing between it and Claude's version, that is Grok Build vs Claude Code.
Grok 4.7 vs 4.6: coding up 6 to 17 points, overall up 2
My honest reaction to the upgrade: "Same price, slightly better. I'm like cool. But it's just like these are minor updates, you know what I mean?"
The numbers say the same thing, with one surprise in the coding rows.Measure
Grok 4.6
Grok 4.7
ChangePrice per 1M tokens (in / out)
$2 / $6
$2 / $6
NoneCursorBench 4.0 (xAI)
40.4%
46.3%
+5.9 pointsTerminal-Bench 4.0 (xAI)
20.3%
37.6%
+17.3 pointsDeepSWE v1.1 (xAI)
65.2%
71.0%
+5.8 pointsGDPval, office-work Elo (xAI)
1605
1695
+90Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
44
46
+2Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index (with Grok Build)
47
56
+9Output tokens per index task (Artificial Analysis)
~36k (high)
~81k (xhigh)
More than doublexAI's numbers are xAI's own runs. The Artificial Analysis write-up is the independent check, and it agrees on the shape: a big jump on coding agents, a nudge on everything else.
Compare that to the same week at Anthropic. Claude Opus 5.5 landed one day later, and Anthropic says it "performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 on most work" at $4 / $20 per million tokens. That is the bigger update. My full take is in Opus 5.5 vs Fable.
Grok 4.7 is cheap per token, not cheap per job
When I first talked this through, I called 4.7 "way more token efficient." That is half right, and the half that is wrong matters for your bill.
Per token, it is cheap: $6 per million output tokens, against $20 for Claude Opus 5.5 and $50 for Claude Fable 5.1. Per job, it is hungry. Artificial Analysis measured about 81,000 output tokens per task at xhigh effort, against 36,000 for Grok 4.6 and 27,000 for GPT-6 Astra at max.
So the efficiency play is real. It is just the price tag doing the work, not a model that says less.
A Hacker News user, mchusma, noticed the same thing on day one: "It feels kind of like they really had it burn tokens to claw up the benchmarks."
To be fair to xAI, its own CursorBench chart plots Grok 4.7's average cost per task at roughly half of Fable 5.1's or Opus 5's, which is where the launch tagline "half the price of comparable models" comes from. Cheap tokens can still beat expensive ones even when you burn more of them.
Third place, by Musk's own count
What I heard going in was that 4.7 would be at Opus 5 level, and it turned out worse on some things. That is close to what Elon Musk actually posted a week before launch.Musk's pre-launch post, September 14, 2026 (2.3M views): "Grok 4.7 should be roughly on par with Opus 5.0, not 5.1. Better in some ways, worse in others."
After launch he was blunter. His September 21 post, via the Musk post archive: "Grok 4.7 places @SpaceXAI as third, after Anthropic & OpenAI, for agentic coding. When factoring in that Grok is significantly faster & lower cost, it's a great choice for your everyday workhorse."
Artificial Analysis puts it one spot lower. Grok 4.7 with Grok Build ranks fourth on its Coding Agent Index, behind Claude Fable 5.1, GPT-6 Astra and Claude Opus 5.
One correction to my own memory. I thought Elon said Grok 5 would be at Fable level. His September 14 post actually says "Grok 4.9 is probably Astra/Fable class" and "Grok 5 maybe better than anything." Either way, I am waiting on Grok 5.
Because here is the part I actually care about: if you can get Fable-like intelligence at Grok prices, that becomes very intriguing.
Where Grok genuinely wins: price, speed, and a free Build door
I do not think xAI's models are impressive right now. I also think Grok is not to be messed with at this point. They are playing the efficiency game well. 4.6 was pretty good, and 4.7 is solid, for what it is worth.
Here is what Grok 4.7 has going for it:Price per token. $2 / $6 per million, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5 and $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1. The output rate is under a third of Opus 5.5's.
More model, same bill. moojacob on Hacker News: "Apparently Grok 4.7 has 40% more weights than Grok 4.6, but the price ($6 output token, $2 input) is the same." xAI has not published a parameter count, so treat the 40% as reporting, not spec.
Speed. xAI serves it at 4.6's speed, and Grok 4.7 Fast gives you 2x the output speed at 2x the price. Musk's own pitch is "significantly faster & lower cost."
A free door. Grok Build has been on every plan, including Free, since August 19, 2026.Grok Bot will not tell you if it runs 4.7
I cannot tell you whether Grok Bot is on 4.7. Grok Bot, ironically, can't confirm which model it is using.
My guess is that a day after launch, it is. But nobody knows what the Bot uses under the hood; it just does whatever it does. So I am not going to vouch for 4.7 there. Build is the only place I have confirmed it.
If you are weighing the Bot against ChatGPT's agent, that comparison lives in GPT-6 Astra vs Grok Bot.
What to do about Grok 4.7 this week
Nobody should change plans over this release. Here is the move by who you are:If you use free Grok, open Build and try it. Grok Build is on the free plan, and xAI's docs say the Fast variant is held back from Build's free tier.
If you pay for SuperGrok, you already have 4.7 where xAI put it, in Grok Build. In regular chat, xAI has not said, and I have not captured my signed-in picker yet. Build and chat draw from one weekly pool, so read how Grok's usage limits work before you point long Build jobs at it.
If you pay for Claude or ChatGPT, this is not the week to switch. The same week brought Claude Opus 5.5, the bigger update in my book, and GPT-6 Sol. For everyday work, my setup is on Claude at work.
If you code in Cursor, this is where 4.7 makes the most sense: it is on every Cursor plan, cheap per token, and fourth on Artificial Analysis's coding-agent ranking. Try it on a job where speed matters more than the last few points of quality.FAQ
Is Grok 4.7 free?
Partly. Grok Build has been on every Grok plan including Free since August 19, 2026, and xAI's docs say the faster Grok 4.7 Fast variant is not included in Grok Build's free tier. xAI's docs describe the Grok Build coding agent; they do not say which model the chat window's Build mode (the hammer icon) runs on a free account.
Through the API you pay per token: $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens.
Is Grok 4.7 in SuperGrok?
In Grok Build, yes: xAI launched it there, Build is on every plan, and Build showed 4.7 on my SuperGrok Plus account. For regular Grok chat, xAI has not said. Its launch post never mentions the Grok app, SuperGrok or Heavy, and the signed-out grok.com picker shows modes, not model numbers.
What is the difference between Grok 4.7 and Grok 4.6?
Same price ($2 in, $6 out per million tokens), better coding scores. On xAI's own table CursorBench 4.0 goes from 40.4% to 46.3% and Terminal-Bench 4.0 from 20.3% to 37.6%.
Artificial Analysis moves it only 2 points on its overall Intelligence Index (44 to 46) but 9 points on its Coding Agent Index (47 to 56).
What is Grok 4.7 Fast?
The same Grok 4.7 model served on faster infrastructure, at twice the token price. xAI's docs say it is available only in Cursor and Grok Build, is not included in Grok Build's free tier, and is not on the public xAI API.
Is Grok 4.8 next?
Probably, but nothing is published. On September 14, 2026, Elon Musk posted that Grok 4.8 will be a noticeable improvement and that Grok 4.9 is probably Astra/Fable class. There is no release date, model card, or price for either.
Where this comes from
The facts come from xAI, GitHub, Artificial Analysis and Musk's own posts, all read September 22, 2026. What's mine is my SuperGrok Plus account and one failed Grok Build run on 4.7.
I haven't run my own benchmark, and I don't have a screenshot of my signed-in Grok app yet. Last reviewed September 2026.
Quick answer: these two do not compete, and most pages comparing them compare the wrong layer. GPT-6 Astra is a model you hand hard work to.
Grok Bot is a set of agents with their own computer that run standing jobs while you are asleep. I pay for both and they have never once contended for the same task.
If you came for the model question: Grok 4.7 shipped September 21, and the independent Artificial Analysis index still has Astra ahead, 53 to 46.
Does 4.7 close the gap? No. It does not compete with it.
You can put the benchmarks up and laugh. This is not even close.
Every other result ranking for this pairing is framed around benchmarks or API prices: tokens per second, dollars per million, intelligence index. Useful if you are building software. Useless if you have two subscriptions and one Tuesday.
So here is the version for someone with two subscriptions and one Tuesday. The model table first, because that is what changed this week.
Grok 4.7 vs Astra, the model question in one tableGPT-6 Astra
Grok 4.7
SourceIntelligence Index v4.3.2
53 (max effort)
46 (xhigh effort)
Artificial Analysis, read Sep 22GDPval
1542
1695
xAI's own launch chartTerminal-Bench 4.0, xAI's number
Not shown
37.6%
xAI's launch tableTerminal-Bench 4.0, The Decoder's number
60%
26%
The Decoder, Sep 21API price per 1M tokens (in / out)
$10 / $50
$2 / $6
Artificial Analysis; Grok's matches xAI's launch pageCost to run one index task
$0.82 (low) to $3.26 (max)
$2.73 (high) to $3.74 (xhigh)
Artificial Analysis; effort settings differContext window
1M tokens
500K tokens
Artificial AnalysisWhere you can use it
ChatGPT Work and Codex on paid plans
Cursor, Grok Build, Grok API, third-party tools
OpenAI plan pages; xAI's launch pageRead the GDPval row carefully. It is the one chart where Grok 4.7 beats Astra, and it is the chart xAI chose to print. xAI's own Terminal-Bench table leaves Astra out entirely.
Grok is cheaper per token: five times on input, about eight times on output. It is not clearly cheaper per job. On Artificial Analysis's cost to run a task, Grok 4.7 at high effort lands at $2.73 and Astra at low effort at $0.82, because Grok burns far more tokens to finish.
Those are different effort settings, so read it as a caution, not a verdict.
Even Elon Musk does not call it the leader. His launch-day post, via the Musk post archive: "Grok 4.7 places @SpaceXAI as third, after Anthropic & OpenAI, for agentic coding."
And here is the bigger point for me. Astra doesn't even compete with Fable 5.1, let alone the new Opus 5.5. That should tell you where we're at, right?
That last part is my take, not a scoreboard. On Anthropic's own Opus 5.5 table, Opus 5.5 actually trails Astra on two rows: AutomationBench (40.0 vs 41.4) and Terminal-Bench-Science (58.7 vs 64.6). And The Decoder reports Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 tied at 53 on the same Artificial Analysis index.
None of it should move you much, for one reason: you are on a plan, not an invoice. Price per million tokens describes a bill you will never receive.
Where you can actually use Grok 4.7 today
xAI's launch page says it plainly: "Grok 4.7 is available today in Cursor and Grok Build. It is also available through the Grok API, third-party coding harnesses, and model routers and cloud platforms."
xAI's launch page does not list the Grok app in that availability line. So if you pay for SuperGrok and open the chat app, do not assume the new model is the one answering.
Grok Build is the door every Grok subscriber has, because it has been on every plan, free included, since August 19. I've been running it in Grok Build, the one place I've confirmed I'm on 4.7.
The first thing I handed it there, a script to help me find good business ideas, failed. That is all I have really tested it on.
Grok Bot is a separate question. xAI's launch page does not say which model Grok Bot runs, and Grok Bot itself can't confirm it, so I am not assuming the upgrade reached it.
For the full launch breakdown, here is what Grok 4.7 actually is. For what your plan actually buys you, see how Grok's usage pool works.
And if your real question is Grok Bot vs Astra, you are not choosing between two models anyway. You are choosing between a model and an employee. A better model does not change that split.
The category error that decides everythingGPT-6 Astra
Grok BotWhat it is
A model
Named persistent agentsWhere it runs
Your ChatGPT session, in Work or Codex
Its own cloud virtual machineWhose logins
Yours, in your browser
Its own, authenticated onceWhose files
Whatever you give the session
Its machine, under /workspaceWhen it works
While you are there
On a schedule, without youWhat happens at 3am
Nothing
The job runsHow it is billed
Inside your plan allowance
Weekly allowance, then reported overageRead the last two rows again. That is the entire decision.
Astra is the better thinker in this pairing. But it has never once told me something while I was doing something else.
What Astra actually ran for me
Astra shipped September 3, 2026. OpenAI describes it as state-of-the-art on computer use, browsing, software engineering, cybersecurity, science and professional work, with a context window over a million tokens.
In my week it does two things.
Research, and challenging Claude. It is genuinely good at pushing back on Fable when I want a second opinion on something I already believe. That is a real job and it is worth paying for. Smart enough that the disagreement is worth reading rather than annoying.
And this week, a game. The demos of people building games with Astra are real and I wanted in, so I spent a weekend on a Pokemon-style game. The graphics it generated stunned me. The game did not get built.
Between that and my first week of running maximum effort on everything, I burned through two full allowances and produced something ugly.
That is not a knock on the model. I did not ask it the right way and the learning curve is real. But I want it next to the demo reels, because the demo reels are all successes.Astra running in ChatGPT Work on my Pro $100 account. Note the surface: on Plus, Astra appears only in Work and Codex, never in the Chat picker.
The honest cost note: at $100 I feel the ceiling for the first time. With GPT-5.6 Sol (the older Sol, not the GPT-6 Sol that shipped September 22) I felt it a little, but it was manageable. This is not.
If you want to build something serious with Astra, my read is you want the $200 plan. At $100 you miss out.
One catch: OpenAI paused new sign-ups and upgrades to the $200 plan on September 10, and its help center still said so on September 22. Existing $200 subscribers keep renewing.
What Grok Bot actually ran for me
Grok Bot launched August 11, 2026. Named agents, each with standing instructions, sharing one cloud machine per account along with its logins and files.
I use it for orchestration. Analytics, publishing, intelligence, all happening in the background.
Every day, my inbox. Starting at 9am, about three times a day, a bot checks and manages it. I do not open it to triage. I open it to read what is left.
Every day, my numbers. A folder of bots scrapes my own analytics roughly three times a day and writes to a ledger. Shorts, newsletter, LinkedIn, comments. Wins and losses get logged rather than remembered.
I am no longer posting blind, which sounds small and changed how I work more than any model upgrade this year.
Anything that drops in my space. A news scout watches X. Yesterday it told me OpenAI had shipped a new image generation model, and it was right that it mattered.
We are now looking at integrating it into our YouTube thumbnails. That is a bot changing what I did with my afternoon.
And the sniper job. When I see a tweet I want a take on, I dump it into Grok Bot. It reads it instantly because it lives where the tweets are.
Pasting that into a Claude chat is a headache. I do not want to open a terminal just for that.
This is the fastest path from "interesting" to "what do you think."My account today. Inbox Hawk runs three passes a day on a routine and pings me with only what needs a human. That is the job Astra does not have a shape for.
The billing asymmetry nobody prints
This is the most practical difference on this page and I have not seen it anywhere else.
ChatGPT stops you. When your allowance runs out, you wait, use a banked reset, or buy credits deliberately. The worst case is frustration.My ChatGPT meter, September 10, 2026. A ceiling, a reset date, and a $0 balance with auto-reload off. The failure mode here is that work stops.
Grok Bot bills you. Each eligible plan includes a weekly Grok Bot allowance, and extra usage is reported to be billed from model and token cost with no bot-specific spend cap yet. A scheduled agent running unattended with no ceiling is a different category of risk from a subscription that simply stops.
One of these fails by stopping. The other can fail by spending. Watch the second one for a month before you trust it with a schedule.
On price itself, the record needs correcting. Grok Bot is included from SuperGrok at $30, per xAI's pricing page as of September 10, 2026.
Secondary coverage still ties it to SuperGrok Heavy bundling at around $300, and Reworked reported exactly that at launch. Whatever was true then, the page today says otherwise. It is also, notably, not listed as included on Business or Enterprise.xAI's pricing page, September 10, 2026. Grok Bot on the three individual SuperGrok tiers, and not on the two a company would buy.
If you can only pay for one
I asked myself the real version of this: if I had to cancel one tomorrow, which goes?
Astra goes. And I want to be clear that this is not a verdict on quality, because Astra is great and I would miss it and I would have to work out what to do about that.
Which sounds like it contradicts my own buying order above, and it does not. If you have neither, buy the model first, because a model is useful on day one and an agent is useful once you have taught it a job. I have already done that teaching. That is the whole difference.
Grok Bot is serving a more important purpose right now. Tracking the analytics, keeping things updated, doing the things I would otherwise not do. Losing Astra costs me a very good research partner and a sparring opponent. I would feel that.
Losing Grok Bot means a category of work simply stops happening in my business.
The way I keep describing the difference: a conventional automation is like a teddy bear you have to move yourself. The moment you stop moving it, it dies. Occasionally it gets up on its own to do a boring chore, and sometimes it trips and falls and stays down.
Grok Bot plays on its own, walks more smoothly, and when it falls it can get up or call one of the other bots for help.
That is a feel, not a benchmark. It is also why I would cancel the smarter one first.
So which do you buy?You mostly ask questions and want better answers. Neither of these. You want a good chat plan, and that is ChatGPT Plus or Claude Pro.
You have hard, long, multi-step work. Astra, on ChatGPT. And if you intend to build something serious with it, budget the $200 tier, because $100 has a ceiling you will meet. New $200 sign-ups have been paused since September 10, so check before you plan around it.
You have recurring jobs you do at the same time every day and resent. Grok Bot, from $30. Start with one bot, not nine.
AI does real work in your week. Both, in that order. And honestly, for a reason beyond capability: running two vendors means one closed meter does not end your day.There is no AI that does it all. If you are running a business on this, do not rely on one. If I were making real money from it, I would be on the top tier of all of them and consider it a no-brainer, because it makes the money back.
The neighboring decisions: what GPT-6 Astra actually is, which ChatGPT plans get Astra, what is Grok Bot for the week-one field test, and Grok Bot use cases for the full roster. If your comparison is really against Claude's assistant, that is Grok Bot vs Claude Cowork. More at Claude at Work.
Questions people ask
Is Grok 4.7 better than GPT-6 Astra?
Not on the independent numbers. Artificial Analysis's Intelligence Index v4.3.2 has GPT-6 Astra at 53 (max effort) and Grok 4.7 at 46 (xhigh), read September 22, 2026. Grok 4.7 wins on price per token ($2/$6 per million vs $10/$50) and on xAI's own GDPval chart, but it is not clearly cheaper per job.
My take: it is not even close.
Is Grok Bot better than ChatGPT?
They are not the same kind of thing, so the question does not resolve. GPT-6 Astra is a model you send work to inside a session.
Grok Bot is a set of named agents with their own cloud machine and their own logins that run standing jobs whether or not you are there. Comparing them on benchmarks compares the wrong layer.
Can GPT-6 Astra do what Grok Bot does?
Partly, inside a session you started. What it does not do is wake up at 9am on its own, log into your accounts, produce something, and write it somewhere for you to read later. That unattended, scheduled, persistent shape is the thing you are actually buying with Grok Bot.
Do I need both?
If AI does real work in your week, probably yes, and in that order: the model first, the agent second. They never contend for the same job in my week. The model handles thinking and hard multi-step work. The agent handles standing jobs I would otherwise do at the same time every day.
Which one should I cancel?
For me, today, Astra goes first. Not because it is worse, but because Grok Bot is now doing something structural: tracking my analytics and keeping things updated without me. Losing Astra costs me a very good research and sparring partner. Losing Grok Bot means a set of jobs simply stops happening.
How much does each cost?
Astra rides on your ChatGPT subscription, so Plus at $20 or Pro at $100 or $200, with usage inside your plan allowance. OpenAI paused new sign-ups and upgrades to the $200 plan on September 10, 2026, and its help center still said so on September 22.
Grok Bot is included from SuperGrok at $30 per xAI's pricing page. The difference that matters is that a ChatGPT plan simply stops you at the ceiling, while Grok Bot overage is reported to bill from model and token cost with no bot-specific spend cap yet.
Is Grok Bot just Grok chat?
No. Grok chat is a chat window. Grok Bot is a separate product launched August 11, 2026, where named persistent agents run on a cloud virtual machine, one per account, shared across your bots, with their own logins and files.
Where this comes from
The Grok 4.7 numbers come from xAI, Artificial Analysis and The Decoder, read September 22. Grok Bot pricing is xAI's page from September 10, and the screenshots are my own paid accounts.
My only 4.7 run was one failed job in Grok Build, so the verdict up top is my read, not a test.
Correction logSeptember 10, 2026. Published. Grok 4.7 was unreleased, so I kept it off the page on purpose.
September 22, 2026. Grok 4.7 shipped September 21, so I added the model table and where you can use it. Replaced the old line that had Astra and Grok 4.6 tied at 61 with faster Grok: that was Artificial Analysis's older index, and today's v4.3.2 has Astra 53, Grok 4.7 46, and Astra faster (61 vs 47 tokens a second). Added the $200 Pro sign-up pause, labeled the GPT-5.6 Sol line as the older model, and put the FAQ on the page. Re-checked xAI's launch page, Artificial Analysis, The Decoder and OpenAI's help center that day.Published September 10, 2026. Updated September 22, 2026 after Grok 4.7 shipped, with the details in the correction log above.
Chris Alarcon 