Model comparison
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent vs Grok 4.5
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 46.2 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent scores higher in 1 category and Grok 4.5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.5 leads 62.3 to 40.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 89.6% for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent and 79.9% for Grok 4.5.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.
Side by side
| Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 46.2 | 55.0 |
| Released | 2026-03-09 | 2026-07-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 500K |
| Max output | 30K | 500K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 20 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92), Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1457 | 1474 |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.8% |
| FrontierCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1553 |
| SciCode | — | 54.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 46.4% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,309 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —, Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1204 | 1213 |
| APEX-Agents | — | 56.2% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 47.9% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 23.4% |
| GBAEval | — | 65.4% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,887 |
Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48), Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | 79.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1448 | 1462 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 52.6% |
| SimpleBench | — | 70% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 83.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.2% |
| CritPt | — | 15.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 36% |
| DTBench | — | 96.5% |
| LMCA | — | 45.2% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 74.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.92 |
Math Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104), Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1442 | 1459 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 24.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 97.8% |
| ProofBench | — | 31% |
Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119), Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1445 | 1466 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 93.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 48.3% |
Multimodal Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48), Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1259 | 1288 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 27.3% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 22.5% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |
Multilingual Too close to call
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43), Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1475 | 1496 |
| LMArena French | 1466 | 1456 |
| LMArena German | 1456 | 1446 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | 1428 |
| LMArena Korean | 1416 | 1404 |
| LMArena Russian | 1457 | 1448 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1447 | 1450 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84), Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1446 |
Long Context Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88), Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1431 | 1463 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59), Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Grok 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1450 | 1448 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | 1442 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1452 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1579 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better than Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 46.2 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent or Grok 4.5?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent or Grok 4.5 better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 43.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent does, with 1M tokens against 500K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent and Grok 4.5 share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.5 has 52.