Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude 4 Sonnet vs Grok Code Fast 1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

42.79/100
Margin
4.1pts
← winning
38.64/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4 Sonnet #158 (Supported); Grok Code Fast 1 #180 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 4 Sonnet and Grok Code Fast 1 share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude 4 Sonnet; 0 to Grok Code Fast 1.

Updated July 20, 2026
Shared results
12
Claude 4 Sonnet only
4
Grok Code Fast 1 only
0
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude 4 Sonnet if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 256K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude 4 Sonnet is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 42.79 to 38.64. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude 4 Sonnet's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 72.7 against 70.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 72.7% to 70.8%.

Claude 4 Sonnet is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.20 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok Code Fast 1. That is roughly 10.0x on output cost alone. Grok Code Fast 1 gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for Claude 4 Sonnet.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude 4 Sonnet and Grok Code Fast 1
CategoryClaude 4 SonnetΔGrok Code Fast 1
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet72.7Margin← 1.9Grok Code Fast 170.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude 4 SonnetB · Grok Code Fast 1

  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 72.7%B 70.8%
    Winner: Claude 4 SonnetΔ 1.9
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4 Sonnet scored 72.7%; Grok Code Fast 1 scored 70.8%. Claude 4 Sonnet wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 4 SonnetGrok Code Fast 1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4 Sonnet$3 input / $15 outputGrok Code Fast 1$0.2 input / $1.5 outputGrok Code Fast 1 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4 Sonnet40 tok/sGrok Code Fast 1172 tok/sGrok Code Fast 1 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4 Sonnet1.33 sGrok Code Fast 12.81 sClaude 4 Sonnet reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4 Sonnet200KGrok Code Fast 1256KGrok Code Fast 1 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGrok Code Fast 1Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 52.3%75.7%Grok Code Fast 1 leads
Gert LabsSource 39.66%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 18.4%—Not comparable
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet wins
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGrok Code Fast 1Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 72.7%70.8%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
AA-SciCodeSource 37.3%36.2%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGrok Code Fast 1Result
AA-LCRSource 44.3%48.3%Grok Code Fast 1 leads
CritPtSource 1.1%0.0%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGrok Code Fast 1Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.5%21.6%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 68.3%72.7%Grok Code Fast 1 leads
AA-HLESource 4.0%7.5%Grok Code Fast 1 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -9.2%-36.0%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 22.4%23.8%Grok Code Fast 1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 40.8%78.5%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGrok Code Fast 1Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 62.4%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1178—Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetGrok Code Fast 1Result
AA-IFBenchSource 45.4%41.4%Claude 4 Sonnet leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude 4 Sonnet or Grok Code Fast 1?

Claude 4 Sonnet is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 42.79 to 38.64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72.7% and 70.8%.

Which is better for coding, Claude 4 Sonnet or Grok Code Fast 1?

Claude 4 Sonnet has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.7 versus 70.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 20, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.