Fronset Benchmark

Grok 4.7 at a glance

Good enough on 29/54 tasks at the 90% bar. Best value on 0 tasks. Best fit for: Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions, Infrastructure & Utility, Relevance, Classification & Matching, Social & Promoti

Provider
xAI
Model name
grok-4.7
Cost mode:
Qualifies on
29 / 54 tasks (at 90% bar)
Best value on
0 tasks

Cost vs quality across all tasks

0%25%50%75%100%78910Quality score (7–10)Cost-efficiency vs best value (1.0 = best value)Public Response Generation — quality 7.64, 193.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVoice Profile Generation — quality 9.14, 92.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Campaign Generation — quality 7.51, 128.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Sequence Optimization — quality 8.28, 217.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Message Generation — quality 7.90, 248.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSection Prompt Generation — quality 8.49, 81.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEvidence Grounded Claim Generation — quality 7.76, 78.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionGenerated Content Relevance Scoring — quality 8.77, 20.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionMetadata Paragraph Rewriting — quality 7.84, 232.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBatch Text Translation — quality 8.67, 212.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionAuthoritative Source Selection — quality 8.29, 3.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBench Hypothesis Post Generation — quality 8.32, 415.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent To Image Prompt Generation — quality 8.76, 114.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReport Executive Summary Generation — quality 8.11, 56.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Content Summarization — quality 8.52, 64.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Query Generation — quality 7.43, 83.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPersona Policy Eligibility Check — quality 8.46, 71.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfile Pool Matching — quality 7.86, 100.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEngagement Opportunity Triage — quality 8.51, 137.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSocial Post Portfolio Selection — quality 8.49, 131.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCommunity Content Promotion Generation — quality 8.16, 8.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Section Analysis — quality 9.85, 65.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Community Selection — quality 7.62, 14.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReference Preserving Analytical Writing — quality 9.19, 47.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionMulti Perspective Decision Synthesis — quality 8.05, 25.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Cluster Labeling — quality 8.27, 43.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublication Title Package Generation — quality 9.02, 165.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Analysis — quality 8.91, 23.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCatalyst And Scenario Analysis — quality 8.04, 64.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough option

within ~1.3× of the best-value model · 1.3–2× · >2× · ★ this model is the best-value pick on that task. Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the 90% bar are plotted.

Per-task breakdown

TaskCategoryQuality (% of best)ConfidenceOverpay
Authoritative Source SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching96%HIGH3.8x
Community Content Promotion GenerationSocial & Promotional Content95%MEDIUM8.1x
Research Community SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching98%HIGH15x
Generated Content Relevance ScoringRelevance, Classification & Matching98%HIGH21x
Profiled Document Analysis bestFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions100%MEDIUM23x
Multi Perspective Decision SynthesisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions91%MEDIUM25x
Topic Cluster LabelingTopic Organization & Clustering93%HIGH43x
Reference Preserving Analytical WritingLong-form Content Generation100%HIGH48x
Report Executive Summary GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis94%HIGH56x
Catalyst And Scenario AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions92%MEDIUM64x
Structured Content SummarizationContent Summarization & Synthesis95%HIGH65x
Profiled Document Section Analysis bestFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions100%RANKED65x
Persona Policy Eligibility CheckRelevance, Classification & Matching92%MEDIUM72x
Evidence Grounded Claim GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis91%MEDIUM78x
Section Prompt GenerationInfrastructure & Utility93%MEDIUM82x
Research Query GenerationInfrastructure & Utility94%HIGH84x
Voice Profile GenerationLong-form Content Generation95%RANKED93x
Profile Pool MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching90%MEDIUM100x
Content To Image Prompt GenerationInfrastructure & Utility98%RANKED115x
Promotional Campaign GenerationSocial & Promotional Content94%HIGH129x
Social Post Portfolio SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching97%HIGH131x
Engagement Opportunity TriageRelevance, Classification & Matching96%MEDIUM137x
Publication Title Package GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis99%RANKED165x
Public Response GenerationSocial & Promotional Content90%MEDIUM194x
Batch Text TranslationInfrastructure & Utility94%MEDIUM212x
Topic Sequence OptimizationTopic Organization & Clustering93%MEDIUM217x
Metadata Paragraph RewritingInfrastructure & Utility94%RANKED232x
Promotional Message GenerationSocial & Promotional Content92%MEDIUM248x
Bench Hypothesis Post GenerationSocial & Promotional Content94%RANKED416x

Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that clears the quality bar on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option; ★ means this model is that option (no overpayment). Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence): RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) — HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) — MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt). LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site. See the methodology for the exact thresholds.