Model comparison
GPT-4.1 mini vs Grok 4.20
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 mini #160 (Estimated); Grok 4.20 #93 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 mini and Grok 4.20 share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to GPT-4.1 mini; 17 to Grok 4.20.
Updated July 28, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- GPT-4.1 mini only
- 20
- Grok 4.20 only
- 17
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 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
Grok 4.20 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 53.88 to 43.07. 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 coding, where it averages 67.1 against 23.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 23.6% to 76.7%.
Grok 4.20 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $1.60 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 mini. That is roughly 3.8x on output cost alone. Grok 4.20 is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 mini 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 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for GPT-4.1 mini.
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 | GPT-4.1 mini | Δ | Grok 4.20 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | GPT-4.1 mini23.6 | Margin→ 43.5 | Grok 4.2067.1 |
| Agentic | GPT-4.1 miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.2047.1 |
| Reasoning | GPT-4.1 miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.2053.3 |
| Knowledge | GPT-4.1 mini64.2 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.20Not measured |
| Math | GPT-4.1 mini4.5 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.20Not measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-4.1 miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.2070.1 |
| Inst. Following | GPT-4.1 mini88.5 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.20Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 23.6%B 76.7%Winner: Grok 4.20Δ 53.1SWE-bench Verified: GPT-4.1 mini scored 23.6%; Grok 4.20 scored 76.7%. Grok 4.20 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.20 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-4.1 mini$0.4 input / $1.6 output | Grok 4.20$2 input / $6 output | GPT-4.1 mini has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-4.1 mini80 tok/s | Grok 4.20233 tok/s | Grok 4.20 has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-4.1 mini0.76 s | Grok 4.2010.33 s | GPT-4.1 mini reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-4.1 mini1M | Grok 4.202M | Grok 4.20 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.20 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 1.7% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 52.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 0.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 508 | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 47.1% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 62.8% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 38.36% | Not comparable |
CodingGrok 4.20 wins6 benchmarks
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.20 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLUSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 64.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 14.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 66.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 4.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -50.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 17.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 82.0% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 31.6% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 20.3% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 50.2% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.20 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 4.483% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.20 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 58.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1022 | 1252 | Grok 4.20 leads |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 75.2% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 60.9% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 54.1% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 57.4% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 65.8% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-4.1 mini or Grok 4.20?
Grok 4.20 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 53.88 to 43.07. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 23.6% and 76.7%.
Which is better for coding, GPT-4.1 mini or Grok 4.20?
Grok 4.20 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 67.1 versus 23.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.