Model comparison
GPT-4.1 nano vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 8.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 8.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 0% for GPT-4.1 nano and 89.5% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 27.9 | 48.6 |
| Released | 2025-04-14 | 2026-02-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 33K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 46 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 19% | 52.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | 1459 |
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1375 |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,150 |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 57.3% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 18% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1189 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,663 |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | 65.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | 75% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | 89.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | 1451 |
| DTBench | 52.5% | 90.1% |
| LMCA | 5.5% | 38.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | 151.98 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.4% |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 63.8% |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.4 |
Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | 92.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1274 | 1455 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 17.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 14% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | 89.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | 30.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | 1439 |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | 1263 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1416 |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1441 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | 1481 |
| LMArena German | 1288 | 1465 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1198 | 1449 |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | 1458 |
| LMArena French | — | 1476 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1417 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1443 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | 1420 |
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | 1437 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 22.2% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 11.9% |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | 1451 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | 1438 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | 1574 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | 1456 |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 8.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?
GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is GPT-4.1 nano or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.