Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Grok 4.3 vs LFM2.5-8B-A1B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

65.07/100
Margin
23.8pts
← winning
41.25/100
1 category wins0 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: Grok 4.3 supported; LFM2.5-8B-A1B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Grok 4.3 and LFM2.5-8B-A1B share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Grok 4.3; 5 to LFM2.5-8B-A1B.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
13
Grok 4.3 only
13
LFM2.5-8B-A1B only
5
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. LFM2.5-8B-A1B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 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 4.3 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 63 to 37. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Grok 4.3's sharpest advantage is in instruction following, where it averages 81.3 against 68.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is IFBench, 81.3% to 56.5%.

Grok 4.3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.25 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for LFM2.5-8B-A1B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Grok 4.3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for LFM2.5-8B-A1B.

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 4.3 and LFM2.5-8B-A1B
CategoryGrok 4.3ΔLFM2.5-8B-A1B
Inst. FollowingGrok 4.381.3Margin← 12.5LFM2.5-8B-A1B68.8
CodingGrok 4.347.3MarginNo overlapLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured
KnowledgeGrok 4.342.4MarginNo overlapLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured
MathGrok 4.3Not measuredMarginNo overlapLFM2.5-8B-A1B50.0
MultimodalGrok 4.378.1MarginNo overlapLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Grok 4.3B · LFM2.5-8B-A1B

  1. IFBench

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 81.3%B 56.5%
    Winner: Grok 4.3Δ 24.8
    IFBench: Grok 4.3 scored 81.3%; LFM2.5-8B-A1B scored 56.5%. Grok 4.3 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGrok 4.3$1.25 input / $2.5 outputLFM2.5-8B-A1B$0 input / $0 outputLFM2.5-8B-A1B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGrok 4.3209 tok/sLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGrok 4.312.36 sLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGrok 4.31MLFM2.5-8B-A1B128KGrok 4.3 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 97.7%16.1%Grok 4.3 leads
GDPval-AASource 29.2%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 24.1%—Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 17.0%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1085—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 43.86%—Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 12.4%—Not comparable
BFCL v4Source —49.7%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BResult
SciCodeSource 47.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 37.9%4.5%Grok 4.3 leads
AA Coding IndexSource 42.3%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 47.3%7.8%Grok 4.3 leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BResult
AA-LCRSource 64.3%0.0%Grok 4.3 leads
CritPtSource 8.0%0.0%Grok 4.3 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 37.6%8.3%Grok 4.3 leads
GPQASource 90.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 35%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 34.6%9.4%Grok 4.3 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 25.0%47.0%Grok 4.3 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.1%51.3%Grok 4.3 leads
AA-HLESource 35.0%6.9%Grok 4.3 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 18.3%-33.3%Grok 4.3 leads
Math
BenchmarkGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BResult
MATH-500Source —88.8%Not comparable
AIME 2025Source —42.5%Not comparable
AIME26Source —50.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BResult
MMMU-ProSource 78.1%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1232—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.1%—Not comparable
Inst. FollowingGrok 4.3 wins
BenchmarkGrok 4.3LFM2.5-8B-A1BResult
IFBenchSource 81.3%56.5%Grok 4.3 leads
AA-IFBenchSource 81.3%55.6%Grok 4.3 leads
IFEvalSource —91.8%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Grok 4.3 or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?

Grok 4.3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 63 to 37. The biggest single separator in this matchup is IFBench, where the scores are 81.3% and 56.5%.

Which is better for instruction following, Grok 4.3 or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?

Grok 4.3 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 81.3 versus 68.8. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

xAI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 16, 2026

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.