Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 9 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 43.9 to 15.2.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 46.2 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1457 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
| LMArena Search | — | 1204 |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1448 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1442 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | 1259 |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1466 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1447 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1420 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1431 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1436 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1452 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.0 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.