Coding
Like-for-like- Grok 4.20
- 28.2
- Supported · #141/151
- Laguna XS.2
- 24.7
- Supported · #148/151
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Grok 4.20 leads · intervals overlap
Keep up with the models you depend on. Follow price changes, retirements, and API updates.Follow the models you depend on.
Follow model changesUpdated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
Grok 4.20 has the higher public score, 67.13 versus 1.53, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
8 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Share or export
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.
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Grok 4.20
Grok 4.20 leads on the public coding lane, 28.2 to 24.7, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Confidence: limited
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Grok 4.20
Grok 4.20 has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Laguna XS.2 is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: rate-fallback
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, 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.
| Category | Grok 4.20 | Laguna XS.2 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 28.2Supported · #141/151 | 24.7Supported · #148/151 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 6 vs 6 public rows | Grok 4.20 leads · intervals overlap |
| Agentic | 26.7Supported · #145/152 | 22.4Estimated · #149/152 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 4 vs 2 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 49.4Supported · #85/183 | 17.7Estimated · #183/183 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 6 vs 2 public rows | Directional only |
| Reasoning | 34.2Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | 34.6#43/48 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
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.
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Knowledge
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Coding
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Agentic
SWE-bench Verified
Coding
SWE-bench Pro
Coding
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.
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Laguna XS.2 has no comparable published API token rate.
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Laguna XS.2 has no comparable published API token rate.
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Grok 4.20 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Laguna XS.2 has no comparable published API token rate.
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Grok 4.20
2M
Laguna XS.2
256K
Grok 4.20
Not sourced
Laguna XS.2
Not sourced
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Grok 4.20
Not published
Laguna XS.2
No comparable hosted API rate
Grok 4.20
Not sourced
Laguna XS.2
Not sourced
Grok 4.20
Not sourced
Laguna XS.2
Not sourced
Grok 4.20
Not sourced
Laguna XS.2
Not sourced
Grok 4.20
Reasoning
Laguna XS.2
Reasoning
Grok 4.20
Proprietary
Laguna XS.2
Open Weight
Grok 4.20
Proprietary
Laguna XS.2
Open Weight
Grok 4.20
2026-03-10
Laguna XS.2
2026-04-28
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Grok 4.20 leads this result
DeepSearchQA
Not directly comparable
Gert Labs
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Grok 4.20 leads this result
LiveCodeBench Pro
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
Grok 4.20 leads this result
SWE-bench Pro
Grok 4.20 leads this result
Vibe Code Bench
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Grok 4.20 leads this result
SWE-bench (Vals)
Grok 4.20 leads this result
SWE Multilingual
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Not directly comparable
GPQA-D
Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Not directly comparable
HealthBench Hard
Not directly comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)
Not directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Grok 4.20 leads this result
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Grok 4.20 leads this result
MMMU-Pro
Not directly comparable
CharXiv
Not directly comparable
ERQA
Not directly comparable
SimpleVQA
Not directly comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)
Not directly comparable
Grok 4.20 has the higher public score, 67.13 versus 1.53, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.
Grok 4.20 leads the public coding lane, 28.2 to 24.7, with Supported evidence for both models, although the 90% intervals overlap.
Grok 4.20 scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 26.7 to 22.4. Laguna XS.2 is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Grok 4.20 has the larger documented context window: 2M, compared with 256K.
Last updated September 10, 2026
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.