Model comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 4 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 5 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 43.9 to 27.3.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 46.2 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 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 | 56 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1457 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.7% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1127 | 1204 |
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1448 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| DTBench | 81.6% | — |
| LMCA | 37.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1390 | 1442 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | 1259 |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1372 | 1466 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1331 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1321 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1389 | 1447 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1420 |
| IFEval | 91.8% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1431 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1387 | 1436 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1452 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | — |
| WildBench | 85.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4 better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 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 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4 or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 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 and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.