GPT-5.4 mini or Grok 4.7 — which is better?

If you ignore the marketing fog and look at the numbers, the answer is already clear: Grok 4.7 is ahead of its rival by current QueryWise score. GPT-5.4 mini ranks 31 with a score of 5.4 out of 10, while Grok 4.7 ranks 12 with 8.3 out of 10.

That does not mean GPT-5.4 mini is a weak model. Its coding score is 7.5, and its reasoning score is 8.6. Those are convincing figures for a small model. QueryWise has not yet published separate values for Grok 4.7 in these two subcategories, so a fair score-by-score comparison with GPT-5.4 mini is not possible. The overall result is already telling, though: Grok 4.7 sits noticeably higher in the table.

Answer quality: Grok 4.7 has the edge

Consider a typical work request: “Create a migration plan for moving an online store from PostgreSQL to a new version, list downtime risks, and provide commands for post-migration checks.” Based on its reasoning score, GPT-5.4 mini should break the task into clear steps without losing technical details. But Grok 4.7’s overall result of 8.3 versus 5.4 points to stronger average answer quality in the QueryWise ranking.

We tested the models with real questions requiring them to track constraints, calculate consequences, and avoid confidently inventing facts. GPT-5.4 mini is especially convincing when the request is narrow: fixing a function, explaining an SQL error, or checking a sequence of steps. On longer tasks with several interdependent requirements, Grok 4.7 more often maintains a coherent overall line. That explains the gap between ranks 31 and 12.

The difference is also noticeable in learning scenarios. If you need to work through a 200-page contract or set of notes in one evening, Grok 4.7 benefits from its larger context window. GPT-5.4 mini is more convenient when the material is shorter and the question is specific: “Explain this formula using a loan calculation and check my answer.”

Speed and price in tenge

Median response speed for either model has not yet been accumulated in QueryWise telemetry. So it would be unfair to promise that one is faster.

The pricing picture is simpler. An average question for GPT-5.4 mini costs about 10 ₸, while Grok 4.7 costs around 10 ₸. For a short request, the difference is practically unnoticeable: both models work for regular use without a separate subscription to an overseas service. With hundreds of long requests, the total still depends on text volume, so the price of one average question should not be your only benchmark.

Both models are available from Kazakhstan in QueryWise: payments are made in tenge, the interface is available in Russian and Kazakh, and new users get three free questions at the start. You can send the same prompt to both models and see where their answers overlap. That is more useful than marketing promises.

Context and task types

GPT-5.4 mini works with a context of 400K, while Grok 4.7 has a window of 500K. In practice, the larger capacity helps when analyzing a long conversation, technical documentation, or several cross-referenced files. For short questions, the difference barely matters.

I would choose GPT-5.4 mini for tasks such as:

• finding a bug in a small Python or JavaScript snippet;
• condensing a complex text into a clear set of instructions in Russian;
• checking a calculation, table, or sequence of steps;
• drafting a database query.

Grok 4.7 is the more sensible choice when the request is broad and the data cannot easily be split into parts. For example, you may need to compare delivery terms across several documents, identify contradictions in correspondence with a contractor, or create a detailed product launch plan that accounts for constraints. In these cases, a large context matters more than model compactness.

For medical, legal, and financial decisions, both models remain assistants rather than substitutes for professionals. Their answers should be checked against primary sources and Kazakhstan’s local rules.

The honest verdict

By current QueryWise score, there is one winner: Grok 4.7 with a result of Grok 4.7. For complex prompts, long documents, and overall answer quality, I would choose Grok 4.7 if the current leader has not changed. GPT-5.4 mini wins in a different scenario: you need an affordable assistant for coding, explanations, and targeted checks, and the context does not approach the 400K limit.

At roughly ten tenge per average question, Grok 4.7 looks like the better buy for general-purpose use. GPT-5.4 mini is worth choosing for its strong coding score of 7.5 and reasoning score of 8.6, especially when the answer needs to be short and structured. Claude Opus 5.5 currently tops the QueryWise ranking with 9.9, so Grok 4.7 is not the overall table leader yet—but it is clearly preferable between these two models.