Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 4 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 5 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 39.4 to 22.3.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 41.0 | 46.2 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Max output | 32K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 48 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1457 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1148 | 1204 |
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1448 |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 37.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.12 | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
Math Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1431 | 1442 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
| VPCT | 35% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1431 | 1466 |
| LMArena German | 1413 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1422 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1447 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1435 | 1420 |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1431 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1436 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1452 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.4 versus 43.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.