Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 43.9 to 23.1.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 34.6 | 46.2 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.0 (#165), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1342 | 1457 |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| LMArena Search | — | 1204 |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1448 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| DTBench | 67.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
Math Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1307 | 1442 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1265 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| MMLU | 87.3% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | 1259 |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1305 | 1466 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1306 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | 1447 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1420 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1431 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1436 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1452 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.0 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.