Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 48.6 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 38 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 38 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher in 7 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5 leads 66.2 to 48.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 77% for Claude Sonnet 5 and 14% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 54.6 | 48.6 |
| Released | 2026-06-29 | 2026-02-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 51 | 46 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.5 (#26), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1541 | 1375 |
| WeirdML | 68.8% | 52.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1483 | 1459 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,463 | 1,150 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.7% | — |
| CursorBench | 34.1% | — |
| SciCode | 54.3% | — |
| GSO | 37.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.8 (#18), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1194 | 1189 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,378 | 4,663 |
| Terminal-Bench | — | 57.3% |
| APEX-Agents | 54.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 18% |
| GBAEval | 65.3% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 49.1 (#39), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 75.1% | 85.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 35% | 24% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1451 |
| DTBench | 92.5% | 90.1% |
| LMCA | 50% | 38.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.21 | 151.98 |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | 61.4 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 65.1% |
| SimpleBench | 60.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 75% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 89.5% |
| CritPt | 16.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 63.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 35% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 60% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
Math Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 66.2 (#27), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 65.6% | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | 17.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 94.7% | 92.2% |
| ProofBench | 77% | 14% |
| LMArena Math | 1467 | 1455 |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.6 (#47), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | 89.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.7% | 30.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1490 | 1439 |
Multimodal Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.4 (#31), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | 1263 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.9% | 0% |
| LMArena Document | 1466 | 1416 |
Multilingual Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 5: 53.8 (#55), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1441 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1481 |
| LMArena French | 1460 | 1476 |
| LMArena German | 1440 | 1465 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1449 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | 1451 | 1458 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1437 | 1443 |
Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 76.3 (#41), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1452 | 1420 |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 5: 44.8 (#55), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1437 |
| CL-bench | — | 22.2% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 11.9% |
Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 69.2 (#25), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1442 | 1451 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1416 | 1438 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1794 | 1574 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1454 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1236 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5 better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 48.6 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5 or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 5 lists at $2 and $10.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 42.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5 and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?
38 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.