Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Grok 4 vs Claude Opus 4.1
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Grok 4 wins on 7/11 benchmarks
Grok 4 wins 7 of 11 shared benchmarks. Leads in coding · math · reasoning.
Category leads
coding·Grok 4knowledge·Claude Opus 4.1math·Grok 4reasoning·Grok 4
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Grok 4
#73 by perf·no signal
Claude Opus 4.1
#137 by perf·no signal
Best value
Grok 4
6.6x better value than Claude Opus 4.1
Grok 4
6.1 pts/$
$9.00/M
Claude Opus 4.1
0.9 pts/$
$45.00/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
xAI
$250.0B·Tier 1
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
11 benchmarks · 2 models
Grok 4Claude Opus 4.1
Cybench
Grok 4 leads by +1.0
Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning.
Grok 4
43.0
Claude Opus 4.1
42.0
DeepResearch Bench
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +1.8
DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses.
Grok 4
47.9
Claude Opus 4.1
49.7
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Grok 4 leads by +12.4
FrontierMath (Feb 2025) · original research-level math problems created by mathematicians, testing capabilities at the boundary of current AI mathematical reasoning.
Grok 4
19.7
Claude Opus 4.1
7.2
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +2.1
FrontierMath Tier 4 (Jul 2025) · the most challenging tier of frontier mathematics, containing problems that push the absolute limits of AI mathematical reasoning.
Grok 4
2.1
Claude Opus 4.1
4.2
GPQA diamond
Grok 4 leads by +13.0
Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs.
Grok 4
82.7
Claude Opus 4.1
69.7
Lech Mazur Writing
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +4.7
Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication.
Grok 4
80.7
Claude Opus 4.1
85.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Grok 4 leads by +15.1
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Grok 4
84.0
Claude Opus 4.1
68.9
SimpleBench
Grok 4 leads by +0.6
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Grok 4
52.6
Claude Opus 4.1
52.0
SimpleQA Verified
Grok 4 leads by +13.1
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Grok 4
47.9
Claude Opus 4.1
34.8
Terminal Bench
Claude Opus 4.1 leads by +10.8
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.
Grok 4
27.2
Claude Opus 4.1
38.0
WeirdML
Grok 4 leads by +3.0
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Grok 4
45.7
Claude Opus 4.1
42.8
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
Cybench Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning. | 43.0 | 42.0 |
DeepResearch Bench DeepResearch Bench · evaluates AI on complex multi-step research tasks requiring information gathering, synthesis, and producing comprehensive analyses. | 47.9 | 49.7 |
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. | 19.7 | 7.2 |
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. | 2.1 | 4.2 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 82.7 | 69.7 |
Lech Mazur Writing Lech Mazur Writing · evaluates creative writing ability, assessing prose quality, narrative coherence, and stylistic sophistication. | 80.7 | 85.4 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 84.0 | 68.9 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 52.6 | 52.0 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 47.9 | 34.8 |
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. | 27.2 | 38.0 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 45.7 | 42.8 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $3.00 | $15.00 | 256K tokens (~128 books) | $60.00 | |
| $15.00 | $75.00 | 200K tokens (~100 books) | $300.00 |