# Grok 4.6 vs o1

> Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-6-vs-o1
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 29

## Summary

- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 9 categories and o1 in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.4 to 27.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 87.5% for Grok 4.6 and 30.7% for o1.
- Grok 4.6 is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- Grok 4.6 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 56.9 | 40.9 |
| Rank | 21 | 143 |
| Context | 500K | 200K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $15 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.6: 58.5 (#16)
- o1: 46.1 (#70)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 67.3% | 47.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1465 | 1367 |
| DeepSWE | 67.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 48% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| CursorBench | 41.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1617 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 25.3% | — |
| SciCode | 56.5% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,508 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27)
- o1: 24.6 (#117)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.3% | — |
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| GDP.pdf | 17.2% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,047 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20)
- o1: 27.9 (#111)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 75.9% | 41.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.5% | 30.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 40% | 15% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1447 | 1371 |
| DTBench | 97.3% | 74.7% |
| LMCA | 48.5% | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.44 | 141.91 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 67.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80% | — |
| CritPt | 19.7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |
| EBR-Bench | 30.5% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |

## Math

- Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24)
- o1: 36.1 (#175)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 66% | 14.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 99.2% | 73.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1423 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| ProofBench | 51% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 9.3% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20)
- o1: 41.5 (#110)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94% | 76.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 49.3% | 41.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1467 | 1361 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| Confabulations | — | 11.7% |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23)
- o1: 34.2 (#93)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 40% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74)
- o1: 48.6 (#142)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1420 | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1480 | 1394 |
| LMArena French | 1461 | 1344 |
| LMArena German | 1431 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1376 | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | 1397 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1422 | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1404 | 1345 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63)
- o1: 74.8 (#86)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1431 | 1367 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66)
- o1: 50.3 (#9)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1454 | 1378 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80)
- o1: 55.6 (#144)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1428 | 1348 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1425 | 1369 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 70.2% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.6 better than o1?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6 or o1?

Grok 4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.

### Is Grok 4.6 or o1 better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.5 versus 46.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.6 does, with 500K tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and o1 share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.