Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 nano vs Grok 4.20

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

41.1/100
Margin
12.8pts
winning →
53.88/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 nano #170 (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 nano and Grok 4.20 share 1 comparable benchmark result. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to GPT-4.1 nano; 18 to Grok 4.20.

Updated July 28, 2026
Shared results
1
GPT-4.1 nano only
20
Grok 4.20 only
18
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for GPT-4.1 nano and Grok 4.20 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Grok 4.20 is priced at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 nano. Grok 4.20 has the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for GPT-4.1 nano.

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 GPT-4.1 nano and Grok 4.20
CategoryGPT-4.1 nanoΔGrok 4.20
AgenticGPT-4.1 nanoNot measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.2047.1
CodingGPT-4.1 nanoNot measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.2067.1
ReasoningGPT-4.1 nanoNot measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.2053.3
KnowledgeGPT-4.1 nano50.3MarginNo overlapGrok 4.20Not measured
MathGPT-4.1 nano1.0MarginNo overlapGrok 4.20Not measured
MultimodalGPT-4.1 nanoNot measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.2070.1
Inst. FollowingGPT-4.1 nano83.2MarginNo overlapGrok 4.20Not measured

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-4.1 nano$0.1 input / $0.4 outputGrok 4.20$2 input / $6 outputGPT-4.1 nano has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-4.1 nano181 tok/sGrok 4.20233 tok/sGrok 4.20 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-4.1 nano0.63 sGrok 4.2010.33 sGPT-4.1 nano reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-4.1 nano1MGrok 4.202MGrok 4.20 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Result
AA Agentic IndexSource 1.2%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 17.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 0.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 63Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 47.1%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 62.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 38.36%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Result
AA Coding IndexSource 11.1%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 25.9%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
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Result
AA-LCRSource 17.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 53.3%Not comparable
ARC-AGI-3Source 0.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Result
MMLUSource 80.1%Not comparable
GPQASource 50.3%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 9.6%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 51.2%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 3.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -56.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 13.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.4%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
Math
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 1.034%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 40.1%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 9981252Grok 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
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGrok 4.20Result
IFEvalSource 83.2%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 32.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare GPT-4.1 nano and Grok 4.20 on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for GPT-4.1 nano and Grok 4.20 today?

GPT-4.1 nano: $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens Grok 4.20: $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 28, 2026

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.