Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemma 4 12B vs Grok 4.20

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

47.29/100
Margin
7.4pts
winning →
54.68/100
0 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 12B #137 (Estimated); Grok 4.20 #88 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemma 4 12B and Grok 4.20 share 4 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to Gemma 4 12B; 14 to Grok 4.20.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
4
Gemma 4 12B only
19
Grok 4.20 only
14
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 12B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Grok 4.20 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 54.68 to 47.29. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Grok 4.20's sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 53.3 against 43.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MMMU-Pro, 69.1% to 75.2%.

Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 12B.

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 Gemma 4 12B and Grok 4.20
CategoryGemma 4 12BΔGrok 4.20
ReasoningGemma 4 12B43.4Margin 9.9Grok 4.2053.3
MultimodalGemma 4 12B69.1Margin 1.0Grok 4.2070.1
AgenticGemma 4 12BNot measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.2047.1
CodingGemma 4 12BNot measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.2067.1
KnowledgeGemma 4 12B77.5MarginNo overlapGrok 4.20Not measured
MathGemma 4 12B77.5MarginNo overlapGrok 4.20Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Gemma 4 12BB · Grok 4.20
  1. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 69.1%B 75.2%
    Winner: Grok 4.20Δ 6.1
    MMMU-Pro: Gemma 4 12B scored 69.1%; Grok 4.20 scored 75.2%. Grok 4.20 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemma 4 12BNot availableGrok 4.20$2 input / $6 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemma 4 12BNot availableGrok 4.20233 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemma 4 12BNot availableGrok 4.2010.33 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemma 4 12B256KGrok 4.202MGrok 4.20 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 36.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 47.1%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 62.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 38.36%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Result
AA-SciCodeSource 38.2%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench ProSource 74.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 76.7%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 51.8%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 4.06%Not comparable
ReasoningGrok 4.20 wins
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Result
BBHSource 53%Not comparable
MRCRv2Source 43.4%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 55.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 53.3%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Result
GPQASource 78.8%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 78.8%88.5%Grok 4.20 leads
MMLU-ProSource 77.2%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 5.2%31.6%Grok 4.20 leads
MMMLUSource 83.4%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 22.0%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 75.3%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 14.8%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -51.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 16.0%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.8%Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource 20.3%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source 50.2%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Result
AIME26Source 77.5%Not comparable
MultimodalGrok 4.20 wins
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Result
MMMU-ProSource 69.1%75.2%Grok 4.20 leads
MathVisionSource 79.7%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 48.7%65.8%Grok 4.20 leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 69.7%Not comparable
CharXivSource 60.9%Not comparable
ERQASource 54.1%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource 57.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1257Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemma 4 12BGrok 4.20Result
AA-IFBenchSource 73.5%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or Grok 4.20?

Grok 4.20 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 54.68 to 47.29. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MMMU-Pro, where the scores are 69.1% and 75.2%.

Which is better for reasoning, Gemma 4 12B or Grok 4.20?

Grok 4.20 has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 53.3 versus 43.4. Gemma 4 12B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemma 4 12B or Grok 4.20?

Grok 4.20 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.1 versus 69.1. Inside this category, MedXpertQA (MM) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 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.