Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.5 to 42.6 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus costs 3.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 7 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 42.4 to 25.7.
- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is cheaper at $0.30 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 164K.
- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 42.6 | 45.5 |
| Released | 2025-09-22 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 164K | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 41.5 (#114), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#91)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1426 | 1458 |
| SciCode | 40.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 745.17 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | — | 1204 |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 25.7 (#126), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#44)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1427 | 1448 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| CritPt | 1.7% | — |
| DTBench | 81.3% | — |
| LMCA | 28.6% | — |
Math Too close to call
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 35.7 (#138), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 36.6 (#106)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1402 | 1441 |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1445 |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.8 (#44)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 52.3 (#87), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.6 (#40)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1407 | 1440 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1457 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1475 |
| LMArena French | — | 1467 |
| LMArena German | — | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1416 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1447 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 74.4 (#96), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 75.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1420 |
Long Context Too close to call
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 43.5 (#88), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#84)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1426 | 1430 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 61.3 (#87), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.1 (#57)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1420 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1404 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1411 | 1451 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.5 to 42.6 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus costs 3.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (41.5 vs 42.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent does, with 1M tokens against 164K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has 16 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.