Model comparison
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Grok 4.6
Google against SpaceXAI, compared on context, price, and verified benchmark results.
Catalog record checked August 14, 2026; individual provider fields may change.
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Budget
SpaceXAI
Grok 4.6
Frontier
| Specification | Gemini 3.7 Flash | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | SpaceXAI | |
| Tier | Budget | Frontier |
| Context window | Winner: 1.05M | 500K |
| Max output | 66K | Not verified |
| Input / 1M tokens | Winner: $0.75 | $2 |
| Output / 1M tokens | Winner: $3.75 | $6 |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Parameters | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Reasoning levels | low, medium, high | low, medium, high, xhigh |
| Modalities | text, image, video, audio, pdf | text, image |
| Released | August 13, 2026 | August 12, 2026 |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index [high] (2026-08-14) | 56 | Winner: 61 |
Prices are USD per million tokens at standard rates, excluding batch and caching discounts. Bold indicates the better figure where one is objectively better. Values we could not confirm from the provider are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.
Pricing tiers: Gemini 3.7 Flash: Introductory paid-tier rates through 2026-12-31. From 2027-01-01 the standard paid rates are $1.50 / $7.50 per million tokens (Gemini API pricing). Cache is $0.075 / MTok through 2026-12-31, then $0.15. Wire calls to `gemini-3.7-flash`. Thinking levels are `low` / `medium` / `high` (API default medium; no MINIMAL). · Grok 4.6: Base tier is $2/$6 per million tokens; prompts at or above 200K tokens are priced at $4/$12. Cached input is $0.50 / $1.00. Web/X search tool calls bill separately.
Gemini 3.7 Flash
Google's 2026-08-13 Flash workhorse for coding and agents, three weeks after 3.6 Flash, at an introductory $0.75 / $3.75 per million tokens.
Best for
- Coding agents
- Multimodal agent loops
- High-volume Google API work
Watch out
Intro price doubles on 2027-01-01. DeepSWE 1.1 best-effort (high) is 65.3% at $2.18/task; medium scores 65.5% a few cents cheaper. 66K max output (65,536 tokens). Knowledge cutoff is March 2026 on some domains (January 2025 on others).
Grok 4.6
SpaceXAI's current code and chat default — same $2/$6 list as Grok 4.5, with a 500K context window and image input.
Best for
- Coding agents
- Chat and knowledge work
- Cost-sensitive frontier work
Watch out
Token rates double above a 200K-token prompt. DeepSWE 1.1 best-effort for this family is the xhigh row at 66.7% (the catalog table rounds Pass@1 to 67%), not the higher-scoring medium config.
Benchmark
DeepSWE 1.1 in context
Both models shown against the wider field, with cost per completed task alongside the score.
Local leader
Claude Opus 5 [max]
74%
Rows shown
24
Highest published reasoning effort per model (not best Pass@1)
Snapshot date
2026-08-13
Mirrored from deepswe.datacurve.ai
Better is toward the top-right (higher pass rate, lower cost). X-axis is reversed to match DeepSWE’s public chart. v1.1 uses average cost / tokens / steps; v1 uses published medians.
| # | Model | Pass@1 | Cost / task | Tokens / task | Steps / task |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 5 [max] | 74% | $11.84 | 118k | 99 |
| 2 | GPT-5.6 Sol [max] | 73% | $8.39 | 60k | 61 |
| 3 | Claude Fable 5 [max] | 70% | $21.63 | 119k | 88 |
| 4 | GPT-5.6 Terra [max] | 70% | $4.95 | 72k | 76 |
| 5 | Kimi K3 [max] | 69% | $4.65 | 82k | 98 |
| 6 | GPT-5.6 Luna [max] | 67% | $3.03 | 73k | 102 |
| 7 | GPT-5.5 [xhigh] | 67% | $7.23 | 46k | 82 |
| 8 | Grok 4.6 [xhigh] | 67% | $5.50 | 71k | 87 |
| 9 | Gemini 3.7 Flash [high] | 65% | $2.18 | 107k | 125 |
| 10 | DeepSeek V4-Pro [max] | 63% | $0.24 | 106k | 155 |
| 11 | Claude Opus 4.8 [max] | 59% | $13.22 | 135k | 120 |
| 12 | Qwen3.8-Max [xhigh] | 58% | $3.73 | 95k | 111 |
| 13 | Muse Spark 1.2 [xhigh] | 55% | $3.70 | 99k | 101 |
| 14 | Claude Sonnet 5 [max] | 54% | $26.40 | 214k | 268 |
| 15 | Grok 4.5 [high] | 54% | $2.42 | 36k | 61 |
| 16 | DeepSeek V4-Flash [max] | 53% | $0.10 | 108k | 153 |
| 17 | Muse Spark 1.1 [xhigh] | 53% | $2.36 | 74k | 96 |
| 18 | GPT-5.4 [xhigh] | 52% | $5.65 | 71k | 70 |
| 19 | Gemini 3.6 Flash [high] | 47% | $4.42 | 96k | 117 |
| 20 | GLM 5.2 [max] | 44% | $3.92 | 78k | 129 |
| 21 | Gemini 3.5 Flash [high] | 36% | $3.45 | 76k | 105 |
| 22 | Kimi K2.7 Code | 31% | $2.82 | 59k | 149 |
| 23 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 [high] | 30% | $5.52 | 76k | 134 |
| 24 | Gemini 3.1 Pro [high] | 12% | $2.14 | 28k | 76 |
DeepSWE “Best” picks the highest published reasoning effort per model (not the highest pass rate). Small gaps may not be statistically meaningful — confirm on deepswe.datacurve.ai.
When the cheaper one wins
Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper on output at $3.75 per million tokens against $6 for Grok 4.6 — about 1.6×. Use the cheaper tier for classification, extraction, summarisation, and any task where the expensive model’s extra score does not change the accepted output. The expensive one only pays if your hardest task actually fails on the cheap tier. On DeepSWE 1.1, Gemini 3.7 Flash is 65% Pass@1 at $2.18/task versus Grok 4.6 at 67% / $5.5/task. These are standard-tier API rates, excluding batch and cache discounts.
Run the model pickerCommon questions
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Grok 4.6
Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.
Is Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok 4.6 cheaper for input?
Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.75 per million input tokens, against $2 for Grok 4.6 — roughly 2.7× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; Gemini 3.7 Flash has tiered pricing: Introductory paid-tier rates through 2026-12-31. From 2027-01-01 the standard paid rates are $1.50 / $7.50 per million tokens (Gemini API pricing). Cache is $0.075 / MTok through 2026-12-31, then $0.15. Wire calls to `gemini-3.7-flash`. Thinking levels are `low` / `medium` / `high` (API default medium; no MINIMAL). Grok 4.6 has tiered pricing: Base tier is $2/$6 per million tokens; prompts at or above 200K tokens are priced at $4/$12. Cached input is $0.50 / $1.00. Web/X search tool calls bill separately.
Is Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok 4.6 cheaper for output?
Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $3.75 per million output tokens, against $6 for Grok 4.6 — roughly 1.6× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; Gemini 3.7 Flash has tiered pricing: Introductory paid-tier rates through 2026-12-31. From 2027-01-01 the standard paid rates are $1.50 / $7.50 per million tokens (Gemini API pricing). Cache is $0.075 / MTok through 2026-12-31, then $0.15. Wire calls to `gemini-3.7-flash`. Thinking levels are `low` / `medium` / `high` (API default medium; no MINIMAL). Grok 4.6 has tiered pricing: Base tier is $2/$6 per million tokens; prompts at or above 200K tokens are priced at $4/$12. Cached input is $0.50 / $1.00. Web/X search tool calls bill separately.
Which has the larger context window, Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok 4.6?
Gemini 3.7 Flash accepts 1.05M tokens against 500K for Grok 4.6. This only matters if you routinely send very long documents or large codebases.
Do Gemini 3.7 Flash and Grok 4.6 support the same reasoning levels?
Gemini 3.7 Flash exposes low, medium, high, while Grok 4.6 exposes low, medium, high, xhigh.
Should I use Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok 4.6?
Gemini 3.7 Flash is the budget tier and Grok 4.6 the frontier tier. The useful question is whether your hardest task actually fails on the cheaper one — most production volume such as classification, extraction and summarisation does not.
Next step
Choosing between them
Tier and workload decide this more reliably than a leaderboard position does.
If both sit in the same tier, the decision usually comes down to context window and output price rather than headline capability — output tokens dominate real bills.
If one is a step up within the same provider, the useful question is whether your hardest task actually fails on the cheaper tier. Most production volume — classification, extraction, summarization — does not.
Choosing a harness rather than a model — Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Muse Code, or Lovable? Compare agentic harnesses · Latest releases.