Model comparison
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs o1-mini
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 34.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 9 categories and o1-mini in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 8.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 89.5% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 14% for o1-mini.
Side by side
| Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 48.6 | 34.0 |
| Released | 2026-02-17 | 2024-09-12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 30K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | — |
| Results tracked | 46 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112), o1-mini: 35.5 (#224)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 52.3% | 36.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1459 | 1362 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 32.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1375 | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 48% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,150 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 78.8% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46), o1-mini: 24.6 (#118)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 57.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 18% | — |
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| LMArena Search | 1189 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,663 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32), o1-mini: 8.8 (#346)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.1% | 0.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 89.5% | 14% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | 1333 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.98 | 135.82 |
| SimpleBench | — | 18.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 85.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 63.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 72.3% |
| DTBench | 90.1% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 57.9% |
| LMCA | 38.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.4 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 57.8% |
Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65), o1-mini: 35.4 (#186)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 92.2% | 46.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1358 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 44.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 14% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 62% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 89.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60), o1-mini: 34.9 (#192)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.3% | 62.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1316 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 30.2% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 18.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98), o1-mini: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| 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), o1-mini: 43.6 (#182)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | 1289 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1481 | 1314 |
| LMArena French | 1476 | 1293 |
| LMArena German | 1465 | 1278 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1449 | 1245 |
| LMArena Korean | 1417 | 1223 |
| LMArena Russian | 1458 | 1283 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1443 | 1303 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83), o1-mini: 66.7 (#206)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1304 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 65.4% |
Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34), o1-mini: 40.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1437 | 1320 |
| 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), o1-mini: 48.4 (#202)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | o1-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1317 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1438 | 1244 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 64.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1574 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 40.9% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than o1-mini?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 34.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or o1-mini better for coding?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 35.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and o1-mini share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and o1-mini has 39.