Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Grok 4.6
Grok 4.6 has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
GPT-4o vs Grok 4.6
Updated November 10, 2026. Rank says Grok 4.6 is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Share or export
Decision reading
Grok 4.6 has the higher public point estimate, 66.47 versus 30.49. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 1 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
- API price per 1M tokens
GPT-4o: $2.50 input / $10 output
Grok 4.6: $2 input / $6 output
- Context window
GPT-4o: 128K
Grok 4.6: 500K
- Released
GPT-4o: May 13, 2024
Grok 4.6: August 12, 2026
- Shared results
- 1
- GPT-4o only
- 1
- Grok 4.6 only
- 23
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Estimated: GPT-4o · Supported: Grok 4.6. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Grok 4.6
Grok 4.6 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Grok 4.6
Grok 4.6 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-ratesCoding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
GPT-4o is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limitedAgentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
GPT-4o is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limitedCache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. GPT-4o does not fit this workload in one request. GPT-4o has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
—GPT-4o58.6Grok 4.6
Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8
The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
Same basis rules as the category table below
Or describe your own job
The LLM Selector reads what you need a model for and returns a shortlist, ranked in the same order the job pages publish.
Describe the task and constraints. This selector recommends models; it cannot carry out the task or access your files and accounts.
We keep what you type here, drafts included, for 180 days, and after that only the job and requirements read from it. Nothing is tied to your IP address or account. Leave out names and other personal details. Privacy
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
1 GPT-4o only
1 Shared
23 Grok 4.6 only
2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Math
Normalized gap 65.6GPT-4o:0.351%Grok 4.6:65.965%
Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Reasoning
Directional only- GPT-4o
- 22.0
- Estimated · #146/158
- Grok 4.6
- 65.0
- Supported · #22/158
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 3 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Knowledge
Directional only- GPT-4o
- 27.7
- Estimated · #163/179
- Grok 4.6
- 67.9
- Supported · #21/179
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 2 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Agentic
Not comparable- GPT-4o
- Not ranked
- Grok 4.6
- 69.7
- Supported · #11/132
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 7 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Coding
Not comparable- GPT-4o
- Not ranked
- Grok 4.6
- 58.6
- Supported · #23/158
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 9 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- GPT-4o
- Not ranked
- Grok 4.6
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- GPT-4o
- 30.2
- #16/17
- Grok 4.6
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- GPT-4o
- 39.0
- #128/157
- Grok 4.6
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- GPT-4o
- 23.4
- Unranked · 1 rankable row
- Grok 4.6
- 65.6
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | GPT-4o | Grok 4.6 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 22.0Estimated · #146/158 | 65.0Supported · #22/158 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 3 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 27.7Estimated · #163/179 | 67.9Supported · #21/179 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 2 public rows | Directional only |
| Agentic | Not ranked | 69.7Supported · #11/132 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 7 public rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | Not ranked | 58.6Supported · #23/158 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 9 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 0 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | 30.2#16/17 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | 39.0#128/157 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | 23.4Unranked · 1 rankable row | 65.6Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- GPT-4o
- $0.0075
- Fits in one request
- Grok 4.6
- $0.005
- Fits in one request
Grok 4.6 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- GPT-4o
- $0.155
- Fits in one request
- Grok 4.6
- $0.118
- Fits in one request
Grok 4.6 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- GPT-4o
- $0.65
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
- Grok 4.6
- $0.2
- Fits in one request
GPT-4o does not fit this workload in one request. GPT-4o has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Your workload
Enter a month of tokens to price it at both models’ listed API rates.
- GPT-4o
- $45.00
- per month
- Grok 4.6
- $32.00
- per month
Standard listed rates, no batch or volume discounts.
Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGPT-4oGrok 4.6
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
GPT-4o
128K
Grok 4.6
API model ID
GPT-4o
Not sourced
Grok 4.6
grok-4.6
xAI Grok 4.6 release notesCached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
GPT-4o
Not published
Grok 4.6
$0.5 per 1M cached input tokens
xAI Grok 4.6 release notesDocumented inputs
GPT-4o
text, image
OpenAI model page for gpt-4oGrok 4.6
text, image
xAI model page for grok-4.6Documented outputs
GPT-4o
Grok 4.6
Provider availability
GPT-4o
Not sourced
Grok 4.6
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
GPT-4o
Non-Reasoning
Grok 4.6
Reasoning
Weight access
GPT-4o
Proprietary
Grok 4.6
Proprietary
License
GPT-4o
Proprietary
Grok 4.6
Proprietary
Release date
GPT-4o
2024-05-13
Grok 4.6
2026-08-12
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- Grok 4.6 has the higher public point estimate, 66.47 versus 30.49. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.155 vs $0.118. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.65 vs $0.2.
- Context tradeoff
- Grok 4.6 has the larger documented window (500K).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Questions
Which is better, GPT-4o or Grok 4.6?
Grok 4.6 has the higher public point estimate, 66.47 versus 30.49. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, GPT-4o or Grok 4.6?
GPT-4o is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-4o or Grok 4.6?
GPT-4o is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.
Which costs less, GPT-4o or Grok 4.6?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.0075 on GPT-4o and $0.005 on Grok 4.6; repository review costs $0.155 and $0.118; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.65 and $0.2. GPT-4o does not fit this workload in one request. GPT-4o has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Which has the larger context window, GPT-4o or Grok 4.6?
Grok 4.6 has the larger documented context window: 500K, compared with 128K.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence25 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 4.1
GPT-4o—Grok 4.619.70%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 3.0
GPT-4o—Grok 4.626.5%SourceNot directly comparable
APEX-Agents
GPT-4o—Grok 4.657.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
GPT-4o—Grok 4.678.3%SourceNot directly comparable
ApprenticeBench
GPT-4o—Grok 4.613%SourceNot directly comparable
CWE-bench v1
GPT-4o—Grok 4.657.0%SourceNot directly comparable
MazeBench
GPT-4o—Grok 4.61%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Bug Hunt Bench
GPT-4o—Grok 4.627.0 fixesSourceNot directly comparable
DeepSWE
GPT-4o—Grok 4.665.9%SourceNot directly comparable
CursorBench 3.2
GPT-4o—Grok 4.670.8%SourceNot directly comparable
FrontierCode 1.1 Extended
GPT-4o—Grok 4.661.3%SourceNot directly comparable
VulcanBench v3
GPT-4o—Grok 4.687.0%SourceNot directly comparable
FrontierSWE v2
GPT-4o—Grok 4.625.3%SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
GPT-4o—Grok 4.688.2%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench (Vals)
GPT-4o—Grok 4.695.6%SourceNot directly comparable
CursorBench 4.0
GPT-4o—Grok 4.641.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Knowledge
Multilingual
MMLU-ProX
GPT-4o61.1%SourceGrok 4.6—Not directly comparable
Instruction following
Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)
GPT-4o—Grok 4.651.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Math
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Shared sourceGPT-4o0.351%Grok 4.665.965%Grok 4.6 leads this result
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
GPT-4o—Grok 4.631.707%SourceNot directly comparable
25 public results · 1 shared
Watch GPT-4o vs Grok 4.6
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 7,000+ subscribers.
Last updated November 10, 2026