Compare · ModelsLive · 2 picked · head to head
Grok 4 vs Claude Opus 4.5
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Claude Opus 4.5 wins on 11/15 benchmarks
Claude Opus 4.5 wins 11 of 15 shared benchmarks. Leads in agentic · reasoning · coding.
Category leads
agentic·Claude Opus 4.5reasoning·Claude Opus 4.5knowledge·Grok 4coding·Claude Opus 4.5math·Claude Opus 4.5
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Grok 4
#88 by perf·no signal
Claude Opus 4.5
#149 by perf·no signal
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
xAI
$250.0B·Tier 1
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
15 benchmarks · 2 models
Grok 4Claude Opus 4.5
APEX-Agents
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +3.2
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Grok 4
15.2
Claude Opus 4.5
18.4
ARC-AGI
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +13.3
ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization.
Grok 4
66.7
Claude Opus 4.5
80.0
ARC-AGI-2
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +21.7
ARC-AGI-2 · the second iteration of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing novel pattern recognition and abstract reasoning without prior training data.
Grok 4
16.0
Claude Opus 4.5
37.6
Balrog
Grok 4 leads by +0.1
Balrog · benchmarks AI agents on text-based adventure games, testing language understanding, strategic planning, and long-horizon reasoning.
Grok 4
43.6
Claude Opus 4.5
43.5
Chess Puzzles
Grok 4 leads by +16.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Grok 4
28.0
Claude Opus 4.5
12.0
Cybench
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +39.0
Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning.
Grok 4
43.0
Claude Opus 4.5
82.0
FrontierMath-2025-02-28-Private
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +1.0
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 4.5
20.7
FrontierMath-Tier-4-2025-07-01-Private
Claude Opus 4.5 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 4.5
4.2
GeoBench
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +30.0
GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding.
Grok 4
45.0
Claude Opus 4.5
75.0
GPQA diamond
Grok 4 leads by +1.3
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 4.5
81.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +2.1
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Grok 4
84.0
Claude Opus 4.5
86.1
SimpleBench
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +1.8
SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking.
Grok 4
52.6
Claude Opus 4.5
54.4
SimpleQA Verified
Grok 4 leads by +6.1
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 4.5
41.8
Terminal Bench
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +35.9
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 4.5
63.1
WeirdML
Claude Opus 4.5 leads by +18.0
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Grok 4
45.7
Claude Opus 4.5
63.7
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Claude Opus 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 15.2 | 18.4 |
ARC-AGI ARC-AGI · the original Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus, testing whether AI can solve novel visual pattern recognition tasks without memorization. | 66.7 | 80.0 |
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. | 16.0 | 37.6 |
Balrog Balrog · benchmarks AI agents on text-based adventure games, testing language understanding, strategic planning, and long-horizon reasoning. | 43.6 | 43.5 |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 28.0 | 12.0 |
Cybench Cybench · evaluates AI on real Capture-The-Flag cybersecurity challenges, testing vulnerability analysis, exploitation, and security reasoning. | 43.0 | 82.0 |
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 | 20.7 |
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 |
GeoBench GeoBench · tests geographic knowledge and spatial reasoning across countries, landmarks, coordinates, and geopolitical understanding. | 45.0 | 75.0 |
GPQA diamond Graduate-Level Google-Proof QA (Diamond set) · expert-crafted questions in physics, biology, and chemistry that are difficult even for domain PhDs. | 82.7 | 81.4 |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 84.0 | 86.1 |
SimpleBench SimpleBench · tests fundamental reasoning capabilities with straightforward problems designed to expose gaps in basic logical and spatial thinking. | 52.6 | 54.4 |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 47.9 | 41.8 |
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 | 63.1 |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 45.7 | 63.7 |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| — | — | — | — | |
| $5.00 | $25.00 | 200K tokens (~100 books) | $100.00 |
People also compared