Model comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.5 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 4 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 5 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 42.4 to 27.4.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 45.5 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Max output | 32K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 56 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 47.8 (#55), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#91)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1458 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.7% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4: 34.5 (#39), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1127 | 1204 |
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 27.4 (#104), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#44)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1448 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| DTBench | 81.6% | — |
| LMCA | 37.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 40.2 (#80), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 36.6 (#106)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1391 | 1441 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 43.9 (#82), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1384 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 30.9 (#101), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.8 (#44)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | 1259 |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 49.0 (#133), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.6 (#40)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1370 | 1467 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1332 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1318 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1388 | 1447 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 77.3 (#26), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 75.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1420 |
| IFEval | 91.8% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 39.5 (#167), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#84)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1430 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Claude Opus 4: 61.4 (#85), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.1 (#57)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1386 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1451 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | — |
| WildBench | 85.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4 better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.5 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4 or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.