Model comparison
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs Hy3
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 44.2 on the Noometry Index. Hy3 costs 6.8× 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 . 19 shared benchmarks.
TencentSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 6 categories and Hy3 in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 26.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 85.4% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 41.2% for Hy3.
- Hy3 is cheaper at $0.13 / $0.53 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 262K.
- Hy3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Tencent |
| Noometry Index | 48.6 | 44.2 |
| Released | 2026-02-17 | 2026-07-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 30K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.13 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.53 |
| Results tracked | 46 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Hy3 leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112), Hy3: 46.8 (#63)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1375 | 1508 |
| LMArena Coding | 1459 | 1464 |
| WeirdML | 52.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,150 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46), Hy3: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 57.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 18% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1189 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,663 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32), Hy3: 26.1 (#136)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 85.4% | 41.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | 1447 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 89.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 63.8% | — |
| DTBench | 90.1% | — |
| LMCA | 38.7% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.98 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.4 | — |
Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65), Hy3: 40.1 (#93)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1475 |
| 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
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60), Hy3: 40.8 (#114)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1460 |
| GPQA Diamond | 89.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 30.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98), Hy3: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 0% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1416 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40), Hy3: 53.5 (#65)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1481 | 1493 |
| LMArena French | 1476 | 1461 |
| LMArena German | 1465 | 1439 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1449 | 1392 |
| LMArena Korean | 1417 | 1395 |
| LMArena Russian | 1458 | 1432 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1443 | 1456 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83), Hy3: 75.1 (#70)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1426 |
Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34), Hy3: 44.1 (#75)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1437 | 1442 |
| CL-bench | 22.2% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 11.9% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44), Hy3: 62.2 (#81)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1439 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1438 | 1402 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1436 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1574 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than Hy3?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 44.2 on the Noometry Index. Hy3 costs 6.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Hy3?
Hy3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.13 per million input tokens and $0.53 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Hy3 better for coding?
Hy3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.8 versus 42.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Hy3 share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and Hy3 has 19.