Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.3
72
Ornith-1.0-397B
96
Pick Ornith-1.0-397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window.
Coding
+35.1 difference
Grok 4.3
Ornith-1.0-397B
$1.25 / $2.5
$0 / $0
209 t/s
N/A
12.36s
N/A
1M
262K
Pick Ornith-1.0-397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window.
Ornith-1.0-397B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 96 to 72. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Ornith-1.0-397B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 82.4 against 47.3.
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 Ornith-1.0-397B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Grok 4.3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Ornith-1.0-397B.
Ornith-1.0-397B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 96 to 72.
Ornith-1.0-397B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 82.4 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.