Skip to main content

Model comparison

Grok 4.20 vs o3-mini

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.88/100
Margin
7.3pts
← winning
OpenAI
46.55/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Grok 4.20 #93 (Estimated); o3-mini #141 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Grok 4.20 and o3-mini share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to Grok 4.20; 9 to o3-mini.

Updated July 28, 2026
Shared results
1
Grok 4.20 only
18
o3-mini only
9
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o3-mini only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.

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 4.20 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 53.88 to 46.55. 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 coding, where it averages 67.1 against 49.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 76.7% to 49.3%.

Grok 4.20 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens for o3-mini. Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 200K for o3-mini.

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 scores and score margins for Grok 4.20 and o3-mini
CategoryGrok 4.20Δo3-mini
CodingGrok 4.2067.1Margin 17.8o3-mini49.3
AgenticGrok 4.2047.1MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
ReasoningGrok 4.2053.3MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
KnowledgeGrok 4.20Not measuredMarginNo overlapo3-mini77.2
MultimodalGrok 4.2070.1MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
Inst. FollowingGrok 4.20Not measuredMarginNo overlapo3-mini93.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Grok 4.20B · o3-mini
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 76.7%B 49.3%
    Winner: Grok 4.20Δ 27.4
    SWE-bench Verified: Grok 4.20 scored 76.7%; o3-mini scored 49.3%. Grok 4.20 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGrok 4.20o3-miniComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGrok 4.20$2 input / $6 outputo3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 outputo3-mini has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGrok 4.20233 tok/so3-mini160 tok/sGrok 4.20 has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGrok 4.2010.33 so3-mini7.12 so3-mini reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGrok 4.202Mo3-mini200KGrok 4.20 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGrok 4.20o3-miniResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 47.1%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 62.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 38.36%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 28.7%Not comparable
CodingGrok 4.20 wins
BenchmarkGrok 4.20o3-miniResult
LiveCodeBench ProSource 74.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 76.7%49.3%Grok 4.20 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 51.8%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 4.06%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 39.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGrok 4.20o3-miniResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 53.3%Not comparable
ARC-AGI-3Source 0.1%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGrok 4.20o3-miniResult
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
MMLUSource 86.9%Not comparable
GPQASource 77.2%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 19.0%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 74.8%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 8.7%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGrok 4.20o3-miniResult
AIME 2024Source 87.3%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGrok 4.20o3-miniResult
MMMU-ProSource 75.2%Not comparable
CharXivSource 60.9%Not comparable
ERQASource 54.1%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource 57.4%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 65.8%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1252Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGrok 4.20o3-miniResult
IFEvalSource 93.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Grok 4.20 or o3-mini?

Grok 4.20 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 53.88 to 46.55. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 76.7% and 49.3%.

Which is better for coding, Grok 4.20 or o3-mini?

Grok 4.20 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 67.1 versus 49.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 28, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.