Model comparison

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs Phi-4

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 costs 18× 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 . 21 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Phi-4 Microsoft

31.2

Rank #279 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 9 categories and Phi-4 in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 17.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 92.2% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 13.8% for Phi-4.
  • Phi-4 is cheaper at $0.07 / $0.14 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
  • Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Phi-4 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Phi-4 specifications
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
ProviderxAIMicrosoft
Noometry Index48.631.2
Released2026-02-172024-12-11
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output30K4K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.07
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$0.14
Results tracked4637

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): 42.1 (#112), Phi-4: 34.4 (#239)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
LMArena Coding14591231
LMArena WebDev1375—
WeirdML52.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—45.5%
LiveBench Coding—30.7%
BigCodeBench Complete—55.4%
ALE-Bench1,150—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46), Phi-4: 22.8 (#128)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
Terminal-Bench57.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.8%
τ²-bench Banking18%—
BALROG—11.6%
LMArena Search1189—
Vending-Bench 24,663—

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32), Phi-4: 17.7 (#291)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
Chess Puzzles24%1%
LMArena Hard Prompts14511220
Epoch Capabilities Index151.98130.42
ARC-AGI-265.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
NYT Connections (extended)85.4%—
ARC-AGI-189.5%—
Thematic Generalization63.8%—
LiveBench Reasoning—47.8%
DTBench90.1%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—45.2%
LMCA38.7%—
ForecastBench61.4—
LiveBench—41.6%

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65), Phi-4: 20.8 (#285)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%13.8%
LMArena Math14551246
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)44.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
ProofBench14%—
LiveBench Math—42%
MATH Level 5—64.9%

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60), Phi-4: 32.6 (#209)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
GPQA Diamond89.3%56.1%
LMArena Expert14391203
SimpleQA Verified30.2%—
Confabulations—29.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—3.7%
MMLU—84.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98), Phi-4: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—
LMArena Document1416—

Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40), Phi-4: 37.2 (#237)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
LMArena Non-English14411197
LMArena Chinese14811212
LMArena French14761224
LMArena German14651222
LMArena Japanese14491158
LMArena Korean14171151
LMArena Russian14581209
LMArena Spanish14431234

Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83), Phi-4: 60.4 (#251)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
LMArena Instruction Following14201201
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.4%

Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34), Phi-4: 36.9 (#226)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
LMArena Longer Query14371217
CL-bench22.2%—
CL-bench Life11.9%—

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44), Phi-4: 40.5 (#244)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Phi-4
LMArena Text14511217
LMArena Creative Writing14381182
LMArena Multi-Turn14561206
Short-Story Creative Writing—62.6%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1574—
LiveBench Language—25.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than Phi-4?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 costs 18× 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 Phi-4?

Phi-4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.07 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Phi-4 better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Phi-4 share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper