Model comparison
Grok 4.3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 20 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
BenchAlign evidence: Grok 4.3 supported; Step 3.7 Flash estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Grok 4.3 and Step 3.7 Flash share 20 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to Grok 4.3; 10 to Step 3.7 Flash.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 20
- Grok 4.3 only
- 6
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 10
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Step 3.7 Flash only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 20 shared benchmark results across 6 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 57. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Grok 4.3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.25 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.20 input / $1.15 output per 1M tokens for Step 3.7 Flash. That is roughly 2.2x on output cost alone. Grok 4.3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Step 3.7 Flash.
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 | Grok 4.3 | Δ | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Grok 4.347.3 | Margin→ 9.0 | Step 3.7 Flash56.3 |
| Agentic | Grok 4.3Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 Flash66.4 |
| Knowledge | Grok 4.342.4 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Multimodal | Grok 4.378.1 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Grok 4.381.3 | MarginNo overlap | Step 3.7 FlashNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Grok 4.3 | Step 3.7 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Grok 4.3$1.25 input / $2.5 output | Step 3.7 Flash$0.2 input / $1.15 output | Step 3.7 Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Grok 4.3209 tok/s | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Grok 4.312.36 s | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Grok 4.31M | Step 3.7 Flash256K | Grok 4.3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 97.7% | 98.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 29.2% | 25.9% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 24.1% | 21.5% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 17.0% | 14.8% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1085 | 1017 | Grok 4.3 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 43.86% | 51.57% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 12.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 59.5% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 49.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
CodingStep 3.7 Flash wins6 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 37.6% | 30.3% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| GPQASource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 35% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 34.6% | 25.4% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 25.0% | 84.4% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 90.1% | 80.9% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 35.0% | 19.9% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 18.3% | -37.5% | Grok 4.3 leads |
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Grok 4.3 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Grok 4.3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 63 to 57.
Which is better for coding, Grok 4.3 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 56.3 versus 47.3. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.