Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Grok Build 0.1
At a Glance
| Compare |  Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #4 of 4687.7 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #17 of 44$0.085 per LiveBench case | #1 of 44$0.0020 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #2 of 3869.9 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.75Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | $1.00Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $3.75Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | $2.00Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,049K | 256K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 29, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.7 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader | 83.15100% of row best · percent · gemini-3.7-flash-high · 22,610 output tokens / case | 71.0986% of row best · percent · grok-build-0.1 · 980 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 1 benchmark winNo overall winner | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Gemini 3.7 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | xAI |
| Family | Gemini 3 | Grok Build |
| Model | Gemini 3.7 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
| Version | Gemini 3.7 Flash | Grok Build 0.1 |
| Lifecycle | active | preview |
| Released | Unknown | 2026-05-29 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video, Audio, Document | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,049K | 256K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | Unknown |
| Open weights | No | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | No |
| Provider access | Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard) | Xai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
Gemini 3.7 Flash Capabilities
Grok Build 0.1 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.7 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Grok Build 0.1 FAQs
Is Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.7 Flash and Grok Build 0.1, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1?+
Gemini 3.7 Flash is $0.75 and Grok Build 0.1 is $1.00 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Gemini 3.7 Flash is $3.75 and Grok Build 0.1 is $2.00 per million tokens, so Grok Build 0.1 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1?+
Gemini 3.7 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 3.7 Flash supports 1,049K and Grok Build 0.1 supports 256K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Gemini 3.7 Flash is not marked open weight; Grok Build 0.1 is not marked open weight.
Can Gemini 3.7 Flash and Grok Build 0.1 understand images?+
Gemini 3.7 Flash is documented with image input; Grok Build 0.1 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 3.7 Flash is 66K and Grok Build 0.1 is —.
Do Gemini 3.7 Flash and Grok Build 0.1 support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemini 3.7 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Grok Build 0.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1?+
Gemini 3.7 Flash has 2 sourced provider routes; Grok Build 0.1 has 1, so Gemini 3.7 Flash has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemini 3.7 Flash or Grok Build 0.1?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.