Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.20
72
MAI-Thinking-1
65
Verified leaderboard positions: Grok 4.20 unranked · MAI-Thinking-1 #23
Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MAI-Thinking-1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Agentic
+1.1 difference
Coding
+10.0 difference
Grok 4.20
MAI-Thinking-1
$2 / $6
N/A
233 t/s
N/A
10.33s
N/A
2M
256K
Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MAI-Thinking-1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Grok 4.20 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 72 to 65. 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 agentic, where it averages 47.1 against 46. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 76.7% to 73.5%. MAI-Thinking-1 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 256K for MAI-Thinking-1.
Grok 4.20 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 72 to 65. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 76.7% and 73.5%.
MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 71 versus 61. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Grok 4.20 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 47.1 versus 46. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.