Model comparison
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs MiniMax M1
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 39.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax M1 costs 1.8× 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 . 17 shared benchmarks.
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 8 categories and MiniMax M1 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.2 to 25.8.
- MiniMax M1 is cheaper at $0.40 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- MiniMax M1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 48.5 | 39.7 |
| Released | 2026-02-17 | 2025-06-13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 30K | 40K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 46 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 41.8 (#104), MiniMax M1: 39.2 (#149)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1458 | 1359 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1374 | — |
| WeirdML | 52.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,150 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.3 (#43), MiniMax M1: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 57.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 18% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1189 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,663 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.2 (#30), MiniMax M1: 25.8 (#125)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | 1340 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 85.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 89.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 63.8% | — |
| DTBench | 90.1% | — |
| LMCA | 38.7% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.01 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.4 | — |
Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.0 (#54), MiniMax M1: 34.8 (#152)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1360 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 44.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 92.2% | — |
| ProofBench | 14% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#54), MiniMax M1: 35.7 (#168)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | 1316 |
| GPQA Diamond | 89.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 30.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.2 (#88), MiniMax M1: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 0% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1416 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.7 (#38), MiniMax M1: 46.0 (#157)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1320 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1481 | 1361 |
| LMArena French | 1477 | 1369 |
| LMArena German | 1463 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1450 | 1220 |
| LMArena Korean | 1417 | 1263 |
| LMArena Russian | 1457 | 1330 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1442 | 1354 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 75.0 (#79), MiniMax M1: 69.5 (#169)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1312 |
Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.4 (#33), MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#136)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1436 | 1326 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 69.4% |
| CL-bench | 22.2% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 11.9% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.9 (#42), MiniMax M1: 53.3 (#155)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1343 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1439 | 1298 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1335 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1574 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than MiniMax M1?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 39.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax M1 costs 1.8× 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, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or MiniMax M1?
MiniMax M1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or MiniMax M1 better for coding?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 39.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and MiniMax M1 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax M1 has 18.