OpenSand

Grok 4.7 scores 46 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index to bring SpaceXAI into the top 4 AI labs. Coding Agent Index performance has also improved, overtaking GPT-5.6 Sol Grok 4.7 scores +2 points over Grok 4.6 on the Intelligence Index, with strong performance on agentic knowledge work tasks. We evaluated the new model at xhigh reasoning effort. Congratulations to @spacexai and @ElonMusk on the release! Key takeaways: ➤ Grok 4.7 joins the frontier of agentic knowledge work: Grok 4.7 gains +111 Elo over Grok 4.6 (high) on AA-Briefcase, our private benchmark for long-horizon agentic knowledge work, scoring 1657 Elo and placing it alongside Claude Opus 5 and Claude Fable 5.1 at the frontier. On GDPval-AA, it scores 1695 Elo, +90 ahead of Grok 4.6 (high). ➤ A leap in coding agent performance: Grok 4.7 (xhigh) with Grok Build scores 56 on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, up +9 points from Grok 4.6 (xhigh). Among models in their native harnesses, Grok 4.7 + Grok Build now ranks 4th, behind only Claude Fable 5.1, GPT-6 Astra, and Claude Opus 5. ➤ Incremental performance changes elsewhere: Outside of agentic knowledge work, Grok 4.7 broadly matches Grok 4.6 (high) on the other Intelligence Index tasks. It improves on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (+4.5 percentage points) and GDP.pdf (+3.0 p.p.), with regressions on AA-LCR (-3.7 p.p.) and AutomationBench-AA (-1.1 p.p.). ➤ High token use across tasks: Grok 4.7's gains come with higher token usage. Grok 4.7 (xhigh) uses approximately 81k output tokens per Intelligence Index task, compared with 36k for Grok 4.6 (high) and 27k for GPT-6 Astra (max) - 125% and 196% more, respectively. Other model details: ➤ Context window of 500k tokens, unchanged from Grok 4.6 ➤ Pricing of $2/$6 per 1M input/output tokens with cache hits discounted to $0.50 per 1M tokens, matching Grok 4.6 ➤ Configurable reasoning effort spans low to xhigh. Our evaluation uses xhigh.

Announcing the Artificial Analysis Endpoint Accuracy Index, measuring how much of an open weights model's accuracy each serverless API endpoint preserves. We are initiating coverage with GLM-5.2, gpt-oss-120b and DeepSeek V4 Pro, with Kimi K3 coming soon Providers trade off accuracy to optimize for speed and cost. They quantize weights, write custom kernels and tune their inference stacks, and sometimes they simply ship bugs. We are bringing the rigor of our Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index to measuring endpoints, so developers can pick providers on accuracy, not just price and speed We benchmark each serverless endpoint against our own self-hosted reference deployment of the official weights, where 100% represents matching the reference. An endpoint is at reference parity when its result falls within the 95% confidence interval of the reference. Coverage is live for GLM-5.2, gpt-oss-120b and DeepSeek V4 Pro, with Kimi K3 accuracy coverage launching soon Key elements of the Endpoint Accuracy Index: ➤ Three areas, equally weighted: tool calling (BFCL-500, 500 questions, 3 repeats), scientific reasoning (HLE-250, 250 questions, 10 repeats) and long context recall (AA-LCR-25, 25 questions, 10 repeats). Each subset separates endpoints on the serving choices that drive accuracy differences, with repeats sized for tight confidence intervals ➤ Reference deployment: we self-host the official weights at the lab's recommended precision, following the lab's serving recipe, and publish the complete commands for each reference ➤ Inference parameters: we run the model's highest supported reasoning mode and each endpoint's highest supported output length and context window ➤ Confidence intervals: the parity test accounts for uncertainty in both the endpoint's runs and the reference's runs ➤ Rotating coverage: models enter once sufficient number of providers serve them and exit when a newer version in the same family supersedes them. We benchmark new endpoints as providers launch them and refresh all listed endpoints periodically ➤ Point in time: each result carries the date it was measured, with multi-day benchmarks dated to their final day Key results for GLM-5.2 ➤ Output token limits restrict accuracy. Restrictive limits cut responses off before the model finishes reasoning, and the most restrictive endpoints score half the reference or less on HLE-250 Key results for gpt-oss-120b ➤ Tool call handling separates endpoints. Providers parse and format tool calls differently, and some endpoints score 22% on BFCL-500 against 37% for the reference ➤ Serving configuration changes what the model does at the same requested settings. Some endpoints produce far fewer reasoning tokens at the same configured level, and restricted context windows truncate long context tasks Key results for DeepSeek V4 Pro ➤ DeepSeek V4 Pro endpoints are more in line with the reference. Majority of the endpoints are at reference parity, and DeepSeek's own first-party endpoint scores slightly above the reference

@OpenAI today cut pricing for GPT-5.6 Luna and Terra - Luna is now 80% cheaper per task. Terra remains largely behind Luna and Sol on the Pareto frontier, with a more modest 20% reduction in Cost per Task OpenAI announced a reduction in token pricing for GPT-5.6. Luna pricing fell from $1.00/$6.00 to $0.20/$1.20 per million input/output tokens. GPT-5.6 Terra also had a price reduction, from $2.50/$15.00 to $2.00/$12.00. However, Terra is still not on the Pareto frontier of the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index vs Cost per Task. Cost per Task has fallen 80% and 20% for Luna and Terra respectively. Chart excludes non-reasoning variants.