LLM Reference

Grok Build 0.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash

Grok Build 0.1 (2026) and Step 3.7 Flash (2026) compare a coding-specialized model against a standalone API model. Grok Build 0.1 ships a 256k-token context window, while Step 3.7 Flash ships a 256k-token context window. On pricing, Grok Build 0.1 ranges from $1 to $2/1M input tokens by tier; Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20/1M input tokens. This page treats the result as workflow and deployment fit, not a universal model winner.

Treat this as a product-type comparison: Grok Build 0.1 is coding-specialized model, while Step 3.7 Flash is standalone API model. Choose based on workflow fit before reading any benchmark or price row as decisive.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalGrok Build 0.1Step 3.7 Flash
Product typeCoding-specialized modelStandalone API model
Best forcustom coding agents, code generation, and tool loopsreasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents
Decision fitCoding, RAG, and AgentsCoding, RAG, and Agents
Context window256k256k
Cheapest output$2/1M tokens$1.15/1M tokens
Provider routes3 tracked3 tracked
Shared benchmarks0 rows0 rows

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Grok Build 0.1 when...
  • Local decision data tags Grok Build 0.1 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Choose Step 3.7 Flash when...
  • Step 3.7 Flash has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $1.15/1M tokens.
  • Local decision data tags Step 3.7 Flash for Coding, RAG, and Agents.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.

Lower estimate Step 3.7 Flash

Grok Build 0.1

$1,300

Cheapest tracked route/tier: xAI Console

Step 3.7 Flash

$448

Cheapest tracked route/tier: StepFun

Estimated monthly gap: $853. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.

Switch friction

Grok Build 0.1 -> Step 3.7 Flash
  • Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Step 3.7 Flash is $0.85/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
Step 3.7 Flash -> Grok Build 0.1
  • Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Grok Build 0.1 is $0.85/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.

Specs

Specification
Released2026-05-142026-05-29
Context window256k256k
Parameters198B (11B active)
Architecture-mixture of experts
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
OpennessProprietaryProprietary
Commercial useCommercial use with conditionsCommercial use with conditions
Knowledge cutoff--

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeGrok Build 0.1Step 3.7 Flash
Input price
0-200,001t
$1/1M tokens
200,001t+
$2/1M tokens
$0.20/1M tokens
Output price
0-200,001t
$2/1M tokens
200,001t+
$4/1M tokens
$1.15/1M tokens
Providers

Capabilities

CapabilityGrok Build 0.1Step 3.7 Flash
VisionYesYes
MultimodalYesYes
ReasoningYesYes
Function callingYesYes
Tool useYesYes
Structured outputsYesYes
Code executionNoNo
IDE integrationNoNo
Computer useNoNo
Parallel agentsNoNo

Benchmarks

No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.

Deep dive

The capability footprint is close: both models cover vision, multimodal input, reasoning mode, function calling, and tool use. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.

For cost, Grok Build 0.1 lists tiered pricing: 0-200,001t is $1/1M input and $2/1M output; 200,001t+ is $2/1M input and $4/1M output, while Step 3.7 Flash lists $0.20/1M input and $1.15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Step 3.7 Flash lower by about $0.81 per million blended tokens. For tiered rows, this cheapest-track view can understate interactive or fast-lane spend, so compare the tier you will actually use. Availability is 3 providers versus 3, so concentration risk also matters.

Choose Grok Build 0.1 when coding workflow support are central to the workload. Choose Step 3.7 Flash when vision-heavy evaluation and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.

FAQ

Which has a larger context window, Grok Build 0.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Grok Build 0.1 supports 256k tokens, while Step 3.7 Flash supports 256k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.

Which is cheaper, Grok Build 0.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Grok Build 0.1 lists tiered pricing: 0-200,001t is $1/1M input and $2/1M output; 200,001t+ is $2/1M input and $4/1M output. Step 3.7 Flash lists $0.20/1M input and $1.15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. Compare the tier you will actually use; cheap async pricing can overstate savings for interactive workflows. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.

Is Grok Build 0.1 or Step 3.7 Flash open source?

Grok Build 0.1 is listed under Proprietary. Step 3.7 Flash is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.

Which is better for vision, Grok Build 0.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Both Grok Build 0.1 and Step 3.7 Flash expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.

Which is better for multimodal input, Grok Build 0.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Both Grok Build 0.1 and Step 3.7 Flash expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.

Where can I run Grok Build 0.1 and Step 3.7 Flash?

Grok Build 0.1 is available on xAI Console, Vercel AI Gateway, and OpenRouter. Step 3.7 Flash is available on StepFun, OpenRouter, and NVIDIA NIM. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-06-06. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.