Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Grok 4
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 48.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 8 categories and Grok 4 in 2 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 48.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 72.1% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 16% for Grok 4.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 60.7 | 48.1 |
| Released | 2026-05-28 | 2025-07-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 65 | 48 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), Grok 4: 50.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 82.9% | 45.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1490 | 1408 |
| DeepSWE | 59% | — |
| FrontierCode | 46.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 79.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1556 | — |
| SciCode | 53.5% | — |
| GSO | 47.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,564 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), Grok 4: 32.3 (#68)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| DeepResearch Bench | 50.2% | 47.3% |
| LMArena Search | 1204 | 1142 |
| Terminal-Bench | — | 27.2% |
| APEX-Agents | 48.9% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 63% |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 20.6% | — |
| GDPval | — | 21.1% |
| Remote Labor Index | 8.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | — |
| Cybench | — | 43% |
| PostTrainBench | 33.8% | — |
| BALROG | — | 43.6% |
| GBAEval | 70.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 66.6% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,787 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), Grok 4: 36.7 (#65)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 72.1% | 16% |
| SimpleBench | 64.8% | 60.5% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 88.8% | 73.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | 66.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 34% | 28% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1409 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.21 | 146.44 |
| ForecastBench | 59.9 | 60.9 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.1% | — |
| CritPt | 20.9% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 28.6% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 36% | — |
| DTBench | 94.9% | — |
| LMCA | 57.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 87.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), Grok 4: 48.4 (#64)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 84% |
| LMArena Math | 1487 | 1422 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 47.2% | 19.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | 2.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 80% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 91.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 69% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 60.3% |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), Grok 4: 53.8 (#55)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91% | 87% |
| LMArena Expert | 1502 | 1415 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 53% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 85.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 12.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 72.7% |
Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), Grok 4: 33.7 (#94)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1294 | 1210 |
| GeoBench | — | 45% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 14.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 42.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1475 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), Grok 4: 51.8 (#103)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1450 | 1403 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1427 |
| LMArena French | 1481 | 1418 |
| LMArena German | 1472 | 1429 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1440 | 1394 |
| LMArena Korean | 1432 | 1377 |
| LMArena Russian | 1474 | 1410 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1466 | 1420 |
Instruction Following Grok 4 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), Grok 4: 79.2 (#5)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1387 |
| IFEval | — | 94.9% |
Long Context Grok 4 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), Grok 4: 63.1 (#4)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | 1409 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 94.4% |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), Grok 4: 58.5 (#116)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | 1411 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | 1397 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1476 | 1416 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 76.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1840 | — |
| WildBench | — | 79.7% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1281 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Grok 4?
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 48.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Grok 4 better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 50.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Grok 4 share?
32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4 has 48.