Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok 4
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Gemini 2.5 Pro wins on 13/25 benchmarks
Gemini 2.5 Pro wins 13 of 25 shared benchmarks. Leads in coding · general.
Category leads
coding·Gemini 2.5 Proagentic·Grok 4reasoning·Grok 4knowledge·Grok 4math·Grok 4general·Gemini 2.5 Prolanguage·Grok 4
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Gemini 2.5 Pro
#116 by perf·no signal
Grok 4
#87 by perf·#15 by attention
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Google DeepMind
$4.20T·Tier 1
xAI
$250.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
25 benchmarks · 2 models
Gemini 2.5 ProGrok 4
Aider polyglot
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +3.5
Aider Polyglot · measures how well AI models can edit code across multiple programming languages using the Aider coding assistant framework.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
83.1
Grok 4
79.6
APEX-Agents
Grok 4 leads by +8.6
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
6.6
Grok 4
15.2
ARC-AGI
Grok 4 leads by +25.7
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
41.0
Grok 4
66.7
ARC-AGI-2
Grok 4 leads by +11.1
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
4.9
Grok 4
16.0
Balrog
Grok 4 leads by +0.3
Balrog · benchmarks AI agents on text-based adventure games, testing language understanding, strategic planning, and long-horizon reasoning.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
43.3
Grok 4
43.6
Chess Puzzles
Grok 4 leads by +8.4
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
15.8
Grok 4
24.2
DeepResearch Bench
Grok 4 leads by +4.5
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
42.8
Grok 4
47.3
Fiction.LiveBench
Grok 4 leads by +2.7
Fiction.LiveBench · a continuously updated benchmark using recently published fiction to test reading comprehension and reasoning, preventing data contamination.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
91.7
Grok 4
94.4
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Grok 4 leads by +20.3
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
14.1
Grok 4
34.5
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +0.7
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
4.2
Grok 4
3.5
Gdpval
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +2.2
Gemini 2.5 Pro
23.3
Grok 4
21.1
GeoBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +36.0
GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
81.0
Grok 4
45.0
GPQA diamond
Grok 4 leads by +2.3
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
80.4
Grok 4
82.7
HELM · GPQA
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +2.3
Gemini 2.5 Pro
74.9
Grok 4
72.6
HELM · IFEval
Grok 4 leads by +10.9
Gemini 2.5 Pro
84.0
Grok 4
94.9
HELM · MMLU-Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +1.2
Gemini 2.5 Pro
86.3
Grok 4
85.1
HELM · Omni-MATH
Grok 4 leads by +18.7
Gemini 2.5 Pro
41.6
Grok 4
60.3
HELM · WildBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +6.0
Gemini 2.5 Pro
85.7
Grok 4
79.7
Lech Mazur Writing
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +6.9
Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
83.8
Grok 4
76.9
Metr Time Horizons
Grok 4 leads by +11.1
Gemini 2.5 Pro
55.4
Grok 4
66.6
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +0.7
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
84.7
Grok 4
84.0
SimpleBench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +2.3
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
54.9
Grok 4
52.6
SimpleQA Verified
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +8.1
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
56.0
Grok 4
47.9
Terminal Bench
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +5.4
Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
32.6
Grok 4
27.2
WeirdML
Gemini 2.5 Pro leads by +8.3
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Gemini 2.5 Pro
54.0
Grok 4
45.7
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
Aider polyglot Aider Polyglot · measures how well AI models can edit code across multiple programming languages using the Aider coding assistant framework. | 83.1 | 79.6 |
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 6.6 | 15.2 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 41.0 | 66.7 |
ARC-AGI-2 ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data. | 4.9 | 16.0 |
Balrog Balrog · benchmarks AI agents on text-based adventure games, testing language understanding, strategic planning, and long-horizon reasoning. | 43.3 | 43.6 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 15.8 | 24.2 |
DeepResearch Bench DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses. | 42.8 | 47.3 |
Fiction.LiveBench Fiction.LiveBench · a continuously updated benchmark using recently published fiction to test reading comprehension and reasoning, preventing data contamination. | 91.7 | 94.4 |
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning. | 14.1 | 34.5 |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning. | 4.2 | 3.5 |
Gdpval | 23.3 | 21.1 |
GeoBench GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding. | 81.0 | 45.0 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 80.4 | 82.7 |
HELM · GPQA | 74.9 | 72.6 |
HELM · IFEval | 84.0 | 94.9 |
HELM · MMLU-Pro | 86.3 | 85.1 |
HELM · Omni-MATH | 41.6 | 60.3 |
HELM · WildBench | 85.7 | 79.7 |
Lech Mazur Writing Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication. | 83.8 | 76.9 |
Metr Time Horizons | 55.4 | 66.6 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 84.7 | 84.0 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 54.9 | 52.6 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 56.0 | 47.9 |
Terminal Bench Terminal-Bench 2.0 · evaluates AI agents on real terminal-based coding tasks · writing scripts, debugging, running tests, and managing projects entirely through command-line interaction. Tests both code quality and terminal fluency. Claude Opus 4.7 scores 69.4%, demonstrating significant agentic terminal competence. | 32.6 | 27.2 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 54.0 | 45.7 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $1.25 | $10.00 | 1.0M tokens (~524 books) | $34.38 | |
| — | — | — | — |