Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok 4
Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 44.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 46 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 46 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 4 categories and Grok 4 in 6 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4 leads 46.5 to 31.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GeoBench: 86% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 45% for Grok 4.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | |
| Noometry Index | 44.9 | 47.8 |
| Released | 2025-03-25 | 2025-07-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 78 | 48 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4 leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.8 (#86), Grok 4: 49.9 (#44)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 83.1% | 79.6% |
| WeirdML | 54% | 45.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1452 | 1408 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 57.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 53.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1227 | — |
| SciCode | 42.8% | — |
| GSO | 3.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 85.9% | — |
| CadEval | 64% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.52 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.51 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4 leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.1 (#81), Grok 4: 32.1 (#62)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 32.6% | 27.2% |
| GDPval | 23.3% | 21.1% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | 47.3% |
| BALROG | 43.3% | 43.6% |
| LMArena Search | 1142 | 1142 |
| METR Time Horizons | 55.4% | 66.6% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 63% |
| Remote Labor Index | 0.8% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.7% | — |
| Cybench | — | 43% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 573.64 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4 leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#85), Grok 4: 36.9 (#59)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | 16% |
| SimpleBench | 62.4% | 60.5% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 70.3% | 73.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 41% | 66.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 20% | 28% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1455 | 1409 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.32 | 146.46 |
| ForecastBench | 61.3 | 60.9 |
| CritPt | 2% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.8% | — |
| DTBench | 82.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.9% | — |
| LMCA | 34.8% | — |
| LiveBench | 82.3% | — |
Math Grok 4 leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 31.9 (#191), Grok 4: 46.5 (#58)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84.7% | 84% |
| Omni-MATH | 41.6% | 60.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1450 | 1422 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 14.1% | 19.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | 2.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 24.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 90.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 95.9% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.8 (#41), Grok 4: 53.7 (#50)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.3% | 87% |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | 85.1% |
| Confabulations | 10.6% | 12.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 74.9% | 72.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1452 | 1417 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 21.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7% | — |
Multimodal Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 44.5 (#16), Grok 4: 33.1 (#89)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | 1211 |
| GeoBench | 86% | 45% |
| VPCT | 48% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1421 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 44.7% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.5 (#30), Grok 4: 52.0 (#98)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1403 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1428 |
| LMArena French | 1473 | 1418 |
| LMArena German | 1487 | 1429 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1462 | 1396 |
| LMArena Korean | 1435 | 1376 |
| LMArena Russian | 1460 | 1409 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1419 |
Instruction Following Grok 4 leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.2 (#71), Grok 4: 79.4 (#4)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 84% | 94.9% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1387 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.6% | — |
Long Context Grok 4 leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.7 (#5), Grok 4: 63.1 (#4)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 91.7% | 94.4% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1449 | 1409 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.9 (#60), Grok 4: 58.7 (#111)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1412 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1397 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.8% | 76.9% |
| WildBench | 85.7% | 79.7% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1416 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1421 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 67.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Grok 4?
Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 44.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Grok 4 better for coding?
Grok 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.9 versus 42.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Grok 4 share?
46 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4 has 48.