Which model is better: Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Grok 4?
Grok 4 is 16.7% cheaper for input tokens ($2.50 vs. $3.00 per 1M tokens) and $12.50 vs. $15.00 for output tokens (1.2x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Grok 4 delivers lower response latency at 480ms TTFT (60ms faster than Claude 3.7 Sonnet) with 95 vs. 72 tok/s throughput. Grok 4 leads coding evaluations at 73.2% SWE-bench Verified vs. 70.3% for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and 86.2% vs. 78.5% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Grok 4
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$3.00
$2.50
Grok 4 is 1.2x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$15.00
$12.50
Grok 4 (16.7% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.300
$0.500
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is 1.7x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$3.75
$2.50
Grok 4 is 1.5x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (64k out)
262k (66k out)
Grok 4 (1.3x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
540ms
480ms
Grok 4 (60ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
72 tok/s
95 tok/s
Grok 4 (+23 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
70.3%
73.2%
Grok 4 (+2.9% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
78.5%
86.2%
Grok 4 (+7.7% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
88%
89.9%
Grok 4 (+1.9% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
96.2%
97.6%
Grok 4 (+1.4% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
54.3 / 100
57.6 / 100
Grok 4 (+3.3 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Grok 4 is cheaper at $2.50/1M input tokens ($12.50/1M output) compared to $3.00/1M input ($15.00/1M output) for Claude 3.7 Sonnet.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Grok 4?
Grok 4 delivers faster first-token latency at 480ms TTFT (95 tok/s throughput) compared to 540ms TTFT (72 tok/s) for Claude 3.7 Sonnet.
How do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Grok 4 compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores 70.3% versus 73.2% for Grok 4. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores 78.5% versus 86.2% for Grok 4 (and 96.2% vs 97.6% on MATH-500).
When should you choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet?
Choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Anthropic) for full-stack repository development, complex code refactoring, and agentic tool use with predictable prompt cache economics — offering a 204k context window, 540ms TTFT, and $3.00/1M input pricing ($0.300/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Grok 4?
Choose Grok 4 (xAI) for real-time financial/market intelligence, PhD-level STEM problem solving, and autonomous code generation — offering a 262k context window, 480ms TTFT, and $2.50/1M input pricing ($0.500/1M cached reads).
