Composer 2.5 vs Grok 4.7
Grok 4.7 leads overall, C- to D-. Composer 2.5 is about 6.4x cheaper per task. By suite, Composer 2.5 takes real-world issues (D+ to D) and Grok 4.7 takes spec planning (C to D). Take Composer 2.5 anyway when you want the side that is cheaper per task, faster on real-world issues and ahead on real-world issues.Measured
Each agent graded on the same private suites, running headless through its own tools. Advantages are oriented so a win is a win, whichever way the metric runs.
Verdict: Grok 4.7 vs Composer 2.5
Grok 4.7 leads overall, C- to D-. By suite: Composer 2.5 takes real-world issues, D+ to D (50% vs 47% capability); Grok 4.7 takes spec planning, C to D (68% vs 45% capability); Grok 4.7 takes vibe coding, C to F (64% vs 23% capability). Composer 2.5 used 2.1% of Cursor Pro's monthly limit per pass, $0.023 per task at the listed price. Grok 4.7 used 12% of SuperGrok Plus's weekly limit per pass, $0.145 per task at the listed price. Per task, Composer 2.5 is about 6.4x cheaper ($0.023 vs $0.145). Composer 2.5 is faster on real-world issues: a median task takes 1m 21s against 6m 57s. Both finished every task on it. Reasons to pick Composer 2.5 anyway: it is cheaper per task ($0.023 vs $0.145), it is faster on real-world issues (1m 21s vs 6m 57s median) and it leads on real-world issues (D+ to D).
Changed since W38: Composer 2.5: spec planning D- to D; Grok 4.7 has one graded week under this version (W39).
| Dimension | Composer 2.5 | Grok 4.7 | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 50% | 47% | +3% (Composer 2.5 leads) |
| Median task time | 1m 21s | 6m 57s | 5m 36s faster (Composer 2.5 leads) |
| Approx. task cost | $0.023 / task | $0.077 / task | $0.054 / task lower (Composer 2.5 leads) |
Composer 2.5: 1.7% of Cursor Pro (1.7% / 1m) per run. Grok 4.7: 5.0% of SuperGrok Plus (5.0% / 1w) per run. Each figure is a share of that agent's own plan, so there is no delta to draw.
| Dimension | Composer 2.5 | Grok 4.7 | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 45% | 68% | +23% (Grok 4.7 leads) |
| Median task time | 1m 50s | 37m 24s | 35m 34s faster (Composer 2.5 leads) |
| Approx. task cost | $0.022 / task | $0.402 / task | $0.380 / task lower (Composer 2.5 leads) |
Composer 2.5: 0.4% of Cursor Pro (0.4% / 1m) per run. Grok 4.7: 7.0% of SuperGrok Plus (7.0% / 1w) per run. Each figure is a share of that agent's own plan, so there is no delta to draw.
| Dimension | Composer 2.5 | Grok 4.7 | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 23% | 64% | +41% (Grok 4.7 leads) |
| Median task time | 1m 55s | 11m 10s | 9m 16s faster (Composer 2.5 leads) |
| Approx. task cost | $0.031 / task | $0.092 / task | $0.061 / task lower (Composer 2.5 leads) |
Composer 2.5: 0.2% of Cursor Pro (0.2% / 1m) per good solve. Grok 4.7: 0.4% of SuperGrok Plus (0.4% / 1w) per good solve. Each figure is a share of that agent's own plan, so there is no delta to draw.
Grades and deltas are comparable only within a suite version. See methodology.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better for coding, Composer 2.5 or Grok 4.7?
Grok 4.7 clears higher: tier 4 of 5 versus tier 2 for Composer 2.5 on real-world@v3, our private suite of real-world coding problems. Latest measurement 2026-09-20.
Which is cheaper per task, Composer 2.5 or Grok 4.7?
Composer 2.5 used 2.1% of Cursor Pro's monthly limit per pass, $0.023 per task at the listed price. Grok 4.7 used 12% of SuperGrok Plus's weekly limit per pass, $0.145 per task at the listed price. Per task, Composer 2.5 is about 6.4x cheaper ($0.023 vs $0.145).
What do Composer 2.5 and Grok 4.7 cost a month?
Composer 2.5 runs on Cursor Pro at $20/month (public price as of 2026-07-20). Grok 4.7 runs on SuperGrok Plus at $100/month (public price as of 2026-09-14).