Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.1 vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 42.8 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.1 costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 24 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.1

DeepSeek

42.8

Rank #108 Confirmed

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Summary

They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 27.9.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 53.2% for DeepSeek-V3.1 and 75% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper at $0.25 / $0.95 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 164K.
DeepSeek-V3.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.1 and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) specifications
	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Provider	DeepSeek	xAI
Noometry Index	42.8	48.6
Released	2025-08-21	2026-02-17
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	164K	1M
Max output	8K	30K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.25	$1.25
Output $ / M tokens	$0.95	$2.50
Results tracked	27	46

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 40.3 (#144), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
WeirdML	38.4%	52.3%
LMArena Coding	1417	1459
LMArena WebDev	—	1375
ALE-Bench	—	1,150

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: —, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Terminal-Bench	—	57.3%
τ²-bench Banking	—	18%
LMArena Search	—	1189
Vending-Bench 2	—	4,663

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 27.9 (#110), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Kagi LLM Benchmark	53.2%	75%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1417	1451
DTBench	82.7%	90.1%
LMCA	24.3%	38.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index	139.92	151.98
ForecastBench	58	61.4
ARC-AGI-2	—	65.1%
SimpleBench	40%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	—	85.4%
ARC-AGI-1	—	89.5%
Chess Puzzles	—	24%
Thematic Generalization	—	63.8%

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 38.9 (#122), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Math	1420	1455
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	44.9%
FrontierMath Tier 4	—	17.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	92.2%
ProofBench	—	14%

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 43.7 (#90), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Expert	1405	1439
GPQA Diamond	—	89.3%
SimpleQA Verified	—	30.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	5.5%	—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: —, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Vision	—	1263
Blueprint-Bench 2	—	0%
LMArena Document	—	1416

Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 51.6 (#106), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Non-English	1400	1441
LMArena Chinese	1469	1481
LMArena French	1447	1476
LMArena German	1411	1465
LMArena Japanese	1378	1449
LMArena Korean	1337	1417
LMArena Russian	1405	1458
LMArena Spanish	1431	1443

Instruction Following Too close to call

DeepSeek-V3.1: 73.9 (#110), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Instruction Following	1400	1420

Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.3 (#232), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Longer Query	1422	1437
Fiction.LiveBench	52.8%	—
CL-bench	—	22.2%
CL-bench Life	—	11.9%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 60.3 (#98), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Text	1420	1451
LMArena Creative Writing	1401	1438
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1436	1574
LMArena Multi-Turn	1408	1456

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.1 better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1 or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.95 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Is DeepSeek-V3.1 or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 40.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1 and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.