Model comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher in 2 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 18.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 0.9% for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and 65.1% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
Side by side
| Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 39.5 | 48.6 |
| Released | 2025-02-24 | 2026-02-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 58 | 46 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 40.6 (#136), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1361 | 1459 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 61% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 52.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 64.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1375 |
| GSO | 3.8% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 52.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 74.5% | — |
| CadEval | 54% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,150 |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 34.1 (#50), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 57.3% |
| TheAgentCompany | 30.9% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 18% |
| Cybench | 20% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 43.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 35.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | — | 1189 |
| METR Time Horizons | 60% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,663 |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 18.6 (#277), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.9% | 65.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 28.6% | 89.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | 1451 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.16 | 151.98 |
| ForecastBench | 61.8 | 61.4 |
| SimpleBench | 46.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 75% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| EnigmaEval | 4.2% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 63.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 87.8% | — |
| DTBench | — | 90.1% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 74% | — |
| LMCA | — | 38.7% |
| LiveBench | 76.1% | — |
Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 37.5 (#153), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 92.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1337 | 1455 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 17.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 14% |
| Omni-MATH | 33% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 79% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 39.8 (#130), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79.7% | 89.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | 1439 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 30.2% |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.4% | — |
| Confabulations | 14.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 60.8% | — |
Multimodal Too close to call
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.7 (#95), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1169 | 1263 |
| GeoBench | 68% | — |
| VPCT | 39% | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1416 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 33.9% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 44.1 (#179), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1296 | 1441 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1299 | 1481 |
| LMArena French | 1303 | 1476 |
| LMArena German | 1301 | 1465 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1267 | 1449 |
| LMArena Korean | 1249 | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | 1458 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1298 | 1443 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 72.9 (#125), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1420 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.3% | — |
| IFEval | 83.4% | — |
Long Context Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 50.3 (#10), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1437 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 22.2% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 11.9% |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 54.4 (#150), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1314 | 1451 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1332 | 1438 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1412 | 1574 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1456 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.1% | — |
| WildBench | 81.4% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 59.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 40.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has 58 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.