Model comparison
Grok 4.20 vs MiniMax M3
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Grok 4.20 unranked; MiniMax M3 #18
BenchAlign evidence: Grok 4.20 estimated; MiniMax M3 supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Grok 4.20 and MiniMax M3 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Grok 4.20; 40 to MiniMax M3.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- Grok 4.20 only
- 14
- MiniMax M3 only
- 40
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.20 only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you need the larger 2M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiniMax M3 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 70 versus 68. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
MiniMax M3's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 72.3 against 47.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 47.1% to 66%. Grok 4.20 does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Grok 4.20 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens for MiniMax M3. That is roughly 5.0x on output cost alone. Grok 4.20 is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M3 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for MiniMax M3.
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 4.20 | Δ | MiniMax M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Grok 4.2047.1 | Margin→ 25.2 | MiniMax M372.3 |
| Multimodal | Grok 4.2070.1 | Margin← 5.2 | MiniMax M364.9 |
| Coding | Grok 4.2067.1 | Margin→ 5.1 | MiniMax M372.2 |
| Reasoning | Grok 4.2053.3 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
| Math | Grok 4.20Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M385.7 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 47.1%B 66%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 18.9Terminal-Bench 2.0: Grok 4.20 scored 47.1%; MiniMax M3 scored 66%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 51.8%B 59%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 7.2SWE-bench Pro: Grok 4.20 scored 51.8%; MiniMax M3 scored 59%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 76.7%B 80.5%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 3.8SWE-bench Verified: Grok 4.20 scored 76.7%; MiniMax M3 scored 80.5%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 75.2%B 78.1%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 2.9MMMU-Pro: Grok 4.20 scored 75.2%; MiniMax M3 scored 78.1%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Grok 4.20 | MiniMax M3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Grok 4.20$2 input / $6 output | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | MiniMax M3 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Grok 4.20233 tok/s | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Grok 4.2010.33 s | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Grok 4.202M | MiniMax M31M | Grok 4.20 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticMiniMax M3 wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 47.1% | 66% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| DeepSearchQASource | 62.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 38.36% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 83.5% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 70.1% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.2% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 74.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 35.4% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 88.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 44.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1395 | Not comparable |
| GDPval rubricsSource | — | 74.7% | Not comparable |
| BankerToolBenchSource | — | 76.1% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 19.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 4.6% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1110 | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 32.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 6.7% | Not comparable |
CodingMiniMax M3 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | 74.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 76.7% | 80.5% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 51.8% | 59% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 4.06% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 66.0% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 58.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 42.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 45.4% | Not comparable |
| VIBE V2Source | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
| SVG-BenchSource | — | 63.7% | Not comparable |
| KernelBench HardSource | — | 28.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 44.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 92.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 37.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 1.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 15.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 16.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAMO 2026Source | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
MultimodalGrok 4.20 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 75.2% | 78.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| CharXivSource | 60.9% | — | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | 54.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | 65.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1055 | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1262 | 1294 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 45.1% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 91.6% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.6% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.6% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 82.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Grok 4.20 or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 70 to 68. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 47.1% and 66%.
Which is better for coding, Grok 4.20 or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 67.1. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Grok 4.20 or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 72.3 versus 47.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Grok 4.20 or MiniMax M3?
Grok 4.20 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.1 versus 64.9. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.