Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Grok Code Fast 1
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro #46 (Supported); Grok Code Fast 1 #180 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro and Grok Code Fast 1 share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 22 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro; 11 to Grok Code Fast 1.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- DeepSeek V4 Pro only
- 22
- Grok Code Fast 1 only
- 11
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
DeepSeek V4 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 60.66 to 38.64. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Grok Code Fast 1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.20 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro. DeepSeek V4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Grok Code Fast 1.
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 | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Δ | Grok Code Fast 1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro65.3 | Margin→ 5.5 | Grok Code Fast 170.8 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro59.1 | MarginNo overlap | Grok Code Fast 1Not measured |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro41.3 | MarginNo overlap | Grok Code Fast 1Not measured |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro31.7 | MarginNo overlap | Grok Code Fast 1Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.6%B 70.8%Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProΔ 2.8SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 73.6%; Grok Code Fast 1 scored 70.8%. DeepSeek V4 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Grok Code Fast 1 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro$0.435 input / $0.87 output | Grok Code Fast 1$0.2 input / $1.5 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 ProNot available | Grok Code Fast 1172 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 ProNot available | Grok Code Fast 12.81 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro1M | Grok Code Fast 1256K | DeepSeek V4 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 69.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 46.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 50.28% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 17.1% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 75.7% | Not comparable |
CodingGrok Code Fast 1 wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 82.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 45% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 75.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 72.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 72.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 7.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 21.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 72.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 7.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -36.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 23.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 78.5% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1264 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Grok Code Fast 1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 41.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Grok Code Fast 1?
DeepSeek V4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.66 to 38.64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.6% and 70.8%.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Grok Code Fast 1?
Grok Code Fast 1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.8 versus 65.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.