Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.3
72
LongCat-2.0
80
Pick LongCat-2.0 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Coding
+12.2 difference
Grok 4.3
LongCat-2.0
$1.25 / $2.5
$0.75 / $2.95
209 t/s
N/A
12.36s
N/A
1M
1M
Pick LongCat-2.0 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
LongCat-2.0 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 80 to 72. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
LongCat-2.0's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 59.5 against 47.3.
LongCat-2.0 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.75 input / $2.95 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok 4.3.
LongCat-2.0 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 80 to 72.
LongCat-2.0 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 59.5 versus 47.3. Grok 4.3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.