Model comparison
Grok 4.5 vs o3-mini
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. o3-mini costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 9 categories and o3-mini in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.1 to 16.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 87.2% for Grok 4.5 and 34.5% for o3-mini.
- o3-mini is cheaper at $1.10 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
- Grok 4.5 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Grok 4.5 | o3-mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 55.0 | 36.7 |
| Released | 2026-07-08 | 2024-12-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 500K | 200K |
| Max output | 500K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $1.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35), o3-mini: 40.8 (#132)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 54.1% | 39.8% |
| WeirdML | 46.4% | 43.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1474 | 1378 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 60.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1553 | — |
| GSO | — | 1.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 82.7% |
| CadEval | — | 54% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,309 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17), o3-mini: 29.6 (#84)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 56.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 47.9% | — |
| Cybench | — | 22.5% |
| PostTrainBench | 23.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.4% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1213 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,887 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25), o3-mini: 16.3 (#305)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 52.6% | 3% |
| SimpleBench | 70% | 22.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.2% | 34.5% |
| CritPt | 15.4% | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 36% | 17% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | 1366 |
| DTBench | 96.5% | 68.8% |
| LMCA | 45.2% | 19% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.92 | 140.34 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 89.6% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 70.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 74.4% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.6 |
| LiveBench | — | 75.9% |
Math Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35), o3-mini: 28.1 (#244)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | 18.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 24.4% | 0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | 76.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1459 | 1396 |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 96.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 12.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24), o3-mini: 38.3 (#146)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.4% | 77% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48.3% | 15.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1466 | 1364 |
| Confabulations | — | 17.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72), o3-mini: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 27.3% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42), o3-mini: 45.7 (#164)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1319 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1496 | 1379 |
| LMArena French | 1456 | 1334 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1303 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1428 | 1286 |
| LMArena Korean | 1404 | 1314 |
| LMArena Russian | 1448 | 1304 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1450 | 1321 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48), o3-mini: 75.1 (#72)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1446 | 1337 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 84.4% |
Long Context Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56), o3-mini: 33.8 (#256)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1343 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 50% |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42), o3-mini: 50.3 (#182)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1337 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | 1286 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1320 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 61.7% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1579 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 50.7% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.5 better than o3-mini?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index. o3-mini costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.5 or o3-mini?
o3-mini is cheaper. It lists at $1.10 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Grok 4.5 or o3-mini better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 40.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.5 does, with 500K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and o3-mini share?
32 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and o3-mini has 51.