Skip to main content

Model comparison

Grok 4.3 vs o3-mini

Updated July 30, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Grok 4.3

xAI

64.2/100

Supported · Public rank #36

90% interval 54.5–74.0

o3-mini

OpenAI

46.5/100

Supported · Public rank #141

90% interval 32.2–60.9

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.

0 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Grok 4.3

    Grok 4.3 has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Grok 4.3

    Grok 4.3 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    o3-mini

    o3-mini has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. o3-mini does not fit this workload in one request. o3-mini has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
0
Grok 4.3 only
2
o3-mini only
5
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Agentic

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
49.3
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
77.2
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Grok 4.3
Not measured
o3-mini
93.9
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Grok 4.3
$0.0025
Fits in one request
o3-mini
$0.0033
Fits in one request

Grok 4.3 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Grok 4.3
$0.07
Fits in one request
o3-mini
$0.0682
Fits in one request

o3-mini has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Grok 4.3
$0.09
Fits in one request
o3-mini
$0.286
Does not fit in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate

o3-mini does not fit this workload in one request. o3-mini has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Grok 4.3

1M

o3-mini

200K

API model ID

Grok 4.3

Not sourced

o3-mini

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Grok 4.3

$0.2 per 1M cached input tokens

o3-mini

Not published

Documented inputs

Grok 4.3

Not sourced

o3-mini

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Grok 4.3

Not sourced

o3-mini

Not sourced

Provider availability

Grok 4.3

Not sourced

o3-mini

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Grok 4.3

Reasoning

o3-mini

Reasoning

Weight access

Grok 4.3

Proprietary

o3-mini

Proprietary

License

Grok 4.3

Proprietary

o3-mini

Proprietary

Release date

Grok 4.3

2026-04-30

o3-mini

2025-01-31

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
Repository review: $0.07 vs $0.0682. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.09 vs $0.286.
Context tradeoff
Grok 4.3 has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence7 rows

Agentic

  • Gert Labs

    Grok 4.343.86%
    Source
    o3-mini

    Not directly comparable

  • ResearchClawBench

    Grok 4.312.4%
    Source
    o3-mini

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Grok 4.3
    o3-mini49.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • MMLU

    Grok 4.3
    o3-mini86.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA

    Grok 4.3
    o3-mini77.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME 2024

    Grok 4.3
    o3-mini87.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Grok 4.3
    o3-mini93.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Grok 4.3 or o3-mini?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Grok 4.3 or o3-mini?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Grok 4.3 or o3-mini?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, Grok 4.3 or o3-mini?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.0025 on Grok 4.3 and $0.0033 on o3-mini; repository review costs $0.07 and $0.0682; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.09 and $0.286. o3-mini does not fit this workload in one request. o3-mini has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Which has the larger context window, Grok 4.3 or o3-mini?

Grok 4.3 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 200K.

Related comparisons

Last updated July 30, 2026

Watch Grok 4.3 vs o3-mini

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.