# Grok 4.5 vs o1

> Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 40.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-5-vs-o1
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 29

## Summary

- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 9 categories and o1 in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.0 to 27.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 87.2% for Grok 4.5 and 30.7% for o1.
- Grok 4.5 is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- Grok 4.5 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 55.0 | 40.6 |
| Rank | 22 | 140 |
| Context | 500K | 200K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $15 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.5: 51.7 (#34)
- o1: 45.7 (#64)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 46.4% | 47.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1473 | 1367 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1552 | — |
| SciCode | 54.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,309 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#15)
- o1: 24.3 (#111)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 56.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 47.9% | — |
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| PostTrainBench | 23.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.4% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1213 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,887 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.5: 56.0 (#23)
- o1: 27.5 (#103)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 70% | 41.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.2% | 30.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 36% | 15% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | 1372 |
| DTBench | 96.5% | 74.7% |
| LMCA | 45.2% | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.02 | 141.92 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 52.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.9% | — |
| CritPt | 15.4% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 74.4% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |

## Math

- Grok 4.5: 60.7 (#29)
- o1: 34.9 (#150)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | 14.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1457 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 24.4% | — |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 9.3% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#21)
- o1: 41.5 (#101)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.4% | 76.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48.3% | 41.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1466 | 1362 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| Confabulations | — | 11.7% |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.5: 37.8 (#63)
- o1: 33.6 (#87)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1287 | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 27.3% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.5: 54.5 (#43)
- o1: 48.8 (#137)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1497 | 1394 |
| LMArena French | 1458 | 1343 |
| LMArena German | 1448 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1425 | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | 1402 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1447 | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1452 | 1345 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.5: 76.3 (#45)
- o1: 75.0 (#82)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1446 | 1368 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#54)
- o1: 50.3 (#9)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1378 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.5: 65.9 (#40)
- o1: 55.8 (#139)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1457 | 1368 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 70.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1579 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.5 better than o1?

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 40.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Grok 4.5 or o1?

Grok 4.5 is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.

### Is Grok 4.5 or o1 better for coding?

Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.7 versus 45.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.5 does, with 500K tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and o1 share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.