Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.5 to 45.5 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher in 8 categories and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5 leads 66.1 to 36.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 75.1% for Claude Sonnet 5 and 89.6% for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 54.5 | 45.5 |
| Released | 2026-06-29 | 2026-03-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 51 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.5 (#20), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#91)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1483 | 1458 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.7% | — |
| CursorBench | 34.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1540 | — |
| SciCode | 53.6% | — |
| GSO | 37.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 68.8% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,463 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.7 (#16), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1194 | 1204 |
| APEX-Agents | 54.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,378 | — |
Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 48.2 (#37), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#44)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 75.1% | 89.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1448 |
| SimpleBench | 60.6% | — |
| CritPt | 16.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 35% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 35% | — |
| DTBench | 92.5% | — |
| LMCA | 50% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 60% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.34 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 66.1 (#21), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 36.6 (#106)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1467 | 1441 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 65.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 94.7% | — |
| ProofBench | 77% | — |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.7 (#42), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1491 | 1445 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.7% | — |
Multimodal Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.4 (#26), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.8 (#44)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1275 | 1259 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.9% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1466 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 5: 54.0 (#55), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.6 (#40)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1440 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1475 | 1475 |
| LMArena French | 1457 | 1467 |
| LMArena German | 1448 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1452 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1436 | 1447 |
Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 76.6 (#39), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 75.0 (#80)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1453 | 1420 |
Long Context Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 44.8 (#53), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#84)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1464 | 1430 |
Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 69.4 (#24), Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.1 (#57)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1443 | 1450 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1416 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1454 | 1451 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1794 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1236 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5 better than Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent?
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.5 to 45.5 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5 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 Sonnet 5 lists at $2 and $10.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 or Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5 and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20.