Model comparison

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet Anthropic

34.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 23.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 8.5% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 92.2% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).

Side by side

Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) specifications
Claude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
ProviderAnthropicxAI
Noometry Index34.648.6
Released2024-06-202026-02-17
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—30K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.25
Output $ / M tokens—$2.50
Results tracked6046

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.0 (#165), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
WeirdML40%52.3%
LMArena Coding13421459
Aider Polyglot51.6%—
LMArena WebDev—1375
GSO4.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct46.8%—
LiveBench Coding67.1%—
BigCodeBench Complete58.6%—
CadEval48%—
ALE-Bench—1,150
HumanEval+81.7%—
MBPP+74.3%—

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

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Terminal-Bench—57.3%
TheAgentCompany24%—
τ²-bench Banking—18%
Cybench17.5%—
BALROG32.6%—
LMArena Search—1189
METR Time Horizons45.2%—
Vending-Bench 2—4,663

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Hard Prompts13051451
DTBench67.8%90.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index133.55151.98
ForecastBench60.761.4
ARC-AGI-2—65.1%
SimpleBench41.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—75%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.4%
ARC-AGI-1—89.5%
Chess Puzzles—24%
EnigmaEval0.9%—
Thematic Generalization—63.8%
LiveBench Reasoning56.7%—
LiveBench Data Analysis55%—
LMCA—38.7%
LiveBench59%—

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20258.5%92.2%
LMArena Math13071455
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—44.9%
FrontierMath Tier 4—17.1%
ProofBench—14%
Omni-MATH27.6%—
LiveBench Math52.3%—
MATH Level 556.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)2.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
GPQA Diamond55.3%89.3%
LMArena Expert12651439
Humanity's Last Exam4.1%—
SimpleQA Verified—30.2%
MMLU-Pro77.7%—
Confabulations19.9%—
GPQA (HELM)56.5%—
MMLU87.3%—

Multimodal Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Vision11251263
Video-MME60%—
GeoBench62%—
VPCT33%—
Blueprint-Bench 2—0%
LMArena Document—1416

Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Non-English12831441
LMArena Chinese12721481
LMArena French13051476
LMArena German12971465
LMArena Japanese12341449
LMArena Korean12001417
LMArena Russian13061458
LMArena Spanish12901443

Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Instruction Following12971420
LiveBench Instruction Following69.3%—
IFEval85.5%—

Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Longer Query13111437
CL-bench—22.2%
CL-bench Life—11.9%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Text12981451
LMArena Creative Writing12921438
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14511574
LMArena Multi-Turn13261456
Short-Story Creative Writing80.3%—
WildBench79.2%—
LiveBench Language53.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.

Related comparisons

Go deeper