Model comparison

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs Step 3.7 Flash

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 3.8× 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 . 2 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Step 3.7 Flash StepFun

37.3

Rank #207 Reported

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 3 categories and Step 3.7 Flash in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 21.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 85.4% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 39.7% for Step 3.7 Flash.
  • Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.18 / $1.11 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 256K.
  • Step 3.7 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Step 3.7 Flash specifications
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
ProviderxAIStepFun
Noometry Index48.637.3
Released2026-02-172026-05-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M256K
Max output30K256K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$1.11
Results tracked465

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), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
ALE-Bench1,150694.12
LMArena WebDev1375—
SciCode—40%
WeirdML52.3%—
LMArena Coding1459—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
Terminal-Bench57.3%—
τ²-bench Banking18%—
LMArena Search1189—
Vending-Bench 24,663—

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
NYT Connections (extended)85.4%39.7%
ARC-AGI-265.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
ARC-AGI-189.5%—
CritPt—2.3%
Chess Puzzles24%—
Thematic Generalization63.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1451—
DTBench90.1%—
LMCA38.7%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.98—
ForecastBench61.4—

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)44.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—68.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%—
ProofBench14%—
LMArena Math1455—

Knowledge Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond89.3%—
SimpleQA Verified30.2%—
LMArena Expert1439—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—
LMArena Document1416—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English1441—
LMArena Chinese1481—
LMArena French1476—
LMArena German1465—
LMArena Japanese1449—
LMArena Korean1417—
LMArena Russian1458—
LMArena Spanish1443—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1420—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
CL-bench22.2%—
CL-bench Life11.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1437—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1451—
LMArena Creative Writing1438—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1574—
LMArena Multi-Turn1456—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than Step 3.7 Flash?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 3.8× 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 Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $1.11 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 40.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Step 3.7 Flash share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.

Related comparisons

Go deeper