Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.20
70
Ornith-1.0-35B
67
Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-35B only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+17.1 difference
Grok 4.20
Ornith-1.0-35B
$2 / $6
$0 / $0
233 t/s
N/A
10.33s
N/A
2M
262K
Pick Grok 4.20 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-35B only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Grok 4.20 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 70 versus 67. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Grok 4.20 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Ornith-1.0-35B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 262K for Ornith-1.0-35B.
Grok 4.20 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 70 to 67. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 47.1% and 64.2%.
Ornith-1.0-35B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 47.1. 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.