Model comparison
Grok 3 [Beta] vs Llama 4 Maverick
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: Grok 3 [Beta] #171 (Supported); Llama 4 Maverick #191 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Grok 3 [Beta] and Llama 4 Maverick share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Grok 3 [Beta]; 17 to Llama 4 Maverick.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Grok 3 [Beta] only
- 1
- Llama 4 Maverick only
- 17
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Grok 3 [Beta] if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Llama 4 Maverick only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window.
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
Grok 3 [Beta] is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 40.43 to 23.49. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Grok 3 [Beta]'s sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 2.8 against 0.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 3.793% to 0.690%.
Llama 4 Maverick gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Grok 3 [Beta].
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 | Grok 3 [Beta] | Δ | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Grok 3 [Beta]2.8 | Margin← 2.1 | Llama 4 Maverick0.7 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 3.793%B 0.690%Winner: Grok 3 [Beta]Δ 3.1FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Grok 3 [Beta] scored 3.793%; Llama 4 Maverick scored 0.690%. Grok 3 [Beta] wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Grok 3 [Beta] | Llama 4 Maverick | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Grok 3 [Beta]Not available | Llama 4 Maverick$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Grok 3 [Beta]Not available | Llama 4 Maverick121 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Grok 3 [Beta]Not available | Llama 4 Maverick0.95 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Grok 3 [Beta]128K | Llama 4 Maverick1M | Llama 4 Maverick lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding2 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 3 [Beta] | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 14.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 4.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -41.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 24.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 87.3% | Not comparable |
MathGrok 3 [Beta] wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 3 [Beta] | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 43.0% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Grok 3 [Beta] or Llama 4 Maverick?
Grok 3 [Beta] is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 40.43 to 23.49. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 3.793% and 0.690%.
Which is better for math, Grok 3 [Beta] or Llama 4 Maverick?
Grok 3 [Beta] has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 2.8 versus 0.7. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
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.