Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Grok 4.7

Anthropic · US  |  xAI · US · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 for terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3% or same $2/$10 per million token pricing as sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/mtok as of october 7, 2026. Pick Grok 4.7 for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price or deepswe v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from grok 4.6's 65.2%; cursorbench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Anthropic) and Grok 4.7 (xAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). Grok 4.7 is xAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks. Their biggest split is context window, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecClaude Sonnet 5.5Grok 4.7
ProviderAnthropic (US) xAI (US)
ReleasedSeptember 28, 2026 September 21, 2026
Context window1M tokens (~1,500 pages) 500K tokens (~750 pages)
Price (in/out)$2/$10 per 1M tokens $2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?No — API only No — API only
Modalitiestext, image, code text, image, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Grok 4.7 is comparatively weak here — reviewers note it arrives "late to the AI frontier party" against GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1 and Opus 5.5, all shipped in the weeks just before it

Same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Its 1M tokens window holds about 2× more than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens in a single prompt.

Scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Grok 4.7 is comparatively weak here — 500K context window trails several rivals now sitting at 1M+

2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from Grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price

Grok 4.7

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is comparatively weak here — 1M-token context isn't uniformly available across every platform/plan, consistent with the rest of the 5.5 family

DeepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%

Grok 4.7

Grok 4.7 lists deepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4% among its strengths; Claude Sonnet 5.5 does not.

Trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems

Grok 4.7

Grok 4.7 lists trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems among its strengths; Claude Sonnet 5.5 does not.

Largest single-prompt input

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Its 1M tokens window is about 2× larger than Grok 4.7's 500K tokens, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

→ Claude Sonnet 5.5

Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.

Anyone whose priority is terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3%

→ Claude Sonnet 5.5

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price

→ Grok 4.7

That is its strongest area.

Claude Sonnet 5.5: where it fits

Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). Released September 28, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%, same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026, scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost, and anthropic highlights stronger document/slide generation, spreadsheet work, and visual chart recognition (Chartography: 61.6%).

Its trade-offs are real: anthropic is explicit that Opus 5.5 'remains clearly stronger' on complex, open-ended work requiring sustained judgment, 1M-token context isn't uniformly available across every platform/plan, consistent with the rest of the 5.5 family, and mid-tier update released a week after Opus 5.5 (Sept 22) — Haiku 5.5 followed Oct 7 to complete the family. At $2 in / $10 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

Grok 4.7: where it fits

XAI's September 21, 2026 update — a 2.1T-parameter model trained partly on SpaceX hardware data, same price as Grok 4.6 but stronger on coding benchmarks. Released September 21, 2026 by xAI, it is built for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from Grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price, deepSWE v1.1 (high effort): 71.0%, up from Grok 4.6's 65.2%; CursorBench 4.0: 46.3%, up from 40.4%, trained with supplemental SpaceX data (Starlink telemetry, manufacturing records, engineering failure logs) — xAI says this improves reasoning about hardware and physical systems, and xAI's strongest safety guardrails to date, per the company.

Its trade-offs: release was delayed at least five times since late July 2026 before shipping, 500K context window trails several rivals now sitting at 1M+, and reviewers note it arrives "late to the AI frontier party" against GPT-6 Astra, Claude Fable 5.1 and Opus 5.5, all shipped in the weeks just before it. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Grok 4.7 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Claude Sonnet 5.5 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Sonnet 5.5 for terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3%, Grok 4.7 for 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.

Want both Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Grok 4.7 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Grok 4.7 better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leans toward terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3% while Grok 4.7 leans toward 2.1 trillion parameters, up 40% from grok 4.6's 1.5 trillion, at the same $2/$6 per million token price, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Grok 4.7?

They are priced almost identically, so cost will not decide between them.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 — 1M tokens vs 500K tokens, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Grok 4.7 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 5.5, Grok 4.7 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Grok 4.7?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 — released September 28, 2026, about 7 days after Grok 4.7.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.