Head-to-head comparison across 4benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Opus 4.5
77
Grok 4.3
79
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 #9 · Grok 4.3 unranked
Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+18.6 difference
Knowledge
+12.3 difference
Multimodal
+8.1 difference
Inst. Following
+1.9 difference
Claude Opus 4.5
Grok 4.3
$5 / $25
$1.25 / $2.5
46 t/s
209 t/s
1.01s
12.36s
200K
1M
Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Opus 4.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Grok 4.3 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 79 versus 77. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Grok 4.3's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 78.1 against 70. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is IFBench, 58% to 81.3%. Claude Opus 4.5 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok 4.3. That is roughly 10.0x on output cost alone. Grok 4.3 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Opus 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Grok 4.3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5.
Grok 4.3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 79 to 77. The biggest single separator in this matchup is IFBench, where the scores are 58% and 81.3%.
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.2 versus 53.9. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 65.9 versus 47.3. Grok 4.3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Grok 4.3 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.1 versus 70. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Grok 4.3 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 81.3 versus 79.4. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.