Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Grok 4.1
Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Grok 4.1 in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 54.8 to 33.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Cybench: 82% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 39% for Grok 4.1.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 50.5 | 41.5 |
| Released | 2025-11-01 | 2025-11-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | — |
| Max output | 64K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 69 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1494 | 1214 |
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1445 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 76.8% | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 70.7% | — |
| GSO | 26.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 63.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,025 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.77 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 82% | 39% |
| Terminal-Bench | 63.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 77.5% | — |
| GDPval | 45.5% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 3.8% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 84% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 24.7% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 79.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 92.3% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54.8% | — |
| OSWorld | 66.3% | — |
| BALROG | 43.5% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1180 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 75% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,967 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1476 | 1435 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 37.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 52.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 80% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 11.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 22% | — |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 44.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.09 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
Math Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1422 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 34.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 4.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 36% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 20.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1487 | 1417 |
| GPQA Diamond | 86% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 25.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 45.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), Grok 4.1: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GeoBench | 75% | — |
| VPCT | 40% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1462 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1425 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | 1465 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1448 |
| LMArena German | 1449 | 1446 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1416 | 1397 |
| LMArena Korean | 1424 | 1407 |
| LMArena Russian | 1447 | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | 1438 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | 1400 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1480 | 1416 |
| CL-bench | 21.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1445 | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1466 | 1437 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1687 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Grok 4.1?
Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Grok 4.1 better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Grok 4.1 share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.1 has 19.