# Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Grok 4.6

> Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-3-5-sonnet-vs-grok-4-6
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 24

## Summary

- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.6 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.6 leads 67.0 to 19.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 8.5% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 99.2% for Grok 4.6.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 34.6 | 56.9 |
| Rank | 231 | 21 |
| Context | — | 500K |
| Input $/M | — | $2 |
| Output $/M | — | $6 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.0 (#165)
- Grok 4.6: 58.5 (#16)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 40% | 67.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1342 | 1465 |
| DeepSWE | — | 67.5% |
| FrontierCode | — | 48% |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| CursorBench | — | 41.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1617 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 25.3% |
| SciCode | — | 56.5% |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,508 |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67)
- Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 65.3% |
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 17.2% |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 9,047 |

## Reasoning

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183)
- Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | 75.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1447 |
| DTBench | 67.8% | 97.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | 156.44 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 67.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 80% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.5% |
| CritPt | — | 19.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 30.5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 34% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| LMCA | — | 48.5% |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |

## Math

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288)
- Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | 99.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1307 | 1423 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 66% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 31.7% |
| ProofBench | — | 51% |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245)
- Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | 94% |
| LMArena Expert | 1265 | 1467 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 49.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| MMLU | 87.3% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120)
- Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | 1263 |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 33.2% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 40% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1452 |

## Multilingual

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185)
- Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1420 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | 1480 |
| LMArena French | 1305 | 1461 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1431 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | 1376 |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | 1397 |
| LMArena Russian | 1306 | 1422 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | 1404 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182)
- Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1431 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |

## Long Context

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167)
- Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1454 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164)
- Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80)

| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1428 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1428 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1425 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Grok 4.6?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4.6 better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.5 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Grok 4.6 share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.6 has 49.