Claude Fable 5.1 and Grok 4.7 are both pitched at coding and knowledge work, at very different prices. Fable 5.1, Anthropic's most capable generally available model, costs $10 per million input tokens and $50 per million output tokens and has a 1M-token context window. Grok 4.7, which SpaceXAI (the name xAI now uses) released on September 21, 2026, costs $2 and $6, has a 500,000-token window and ships in Cursor and SpaceXAI's Grok Build terminal agent.
SpaceXAI's launch charts show Grok 4.7 close to Fable 5.1 on the GDPval office-work benchmark and ahead on a legal agent benchmark, while Fable 5.1 leads on CursorBench and Terminal-Bench. Grok's other difference is X: the Grok app answers with information from the web and X, and SpaceXAI's API offers an X Search tool. Fable 5.1 routes many flagged cybersecurity and biology requests to Opus models, which matters if you work in those fields. Run your prompt through both in Omny to see whether the price gap is worth it.
Which should you choose?
Claude
Claude Fable 5.1 · 1M context
Pick it if
you run long agentic coding or research tasks and can pay Fable's rates.
Grok
Grok 4.7 · 500K context
Pick it if
you want lower token prices, X Search, or Grok inside Cursor and Grok Build.
Pick Claude Fable 5.1 for long, unattended coding and research runs; even SpaceXAI's own charts show Fable ahead on its coding tests. Pick Grok 4.7 for cheaper coding and office work, and the Grok app when you want answers drawn from X.
Questions
Is Claude or Grok better for coding?
On SpaceXAI's own launch charts, Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher than Grok 4.7 on CursorBench 4.0 and Terminal-Bench 4.0, while Grok 4.7 costs a fifth as much per input token. For routine coding the cheaper model may be enough, so test both.
Which one can pull posts from X?
Grok. The Grok app answers with information from the web and X, and SpaceXAI's API has an X Search tool you can enable per request.