Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.3
77
ZAYA1-8B
62
Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. ZAYA1-8B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Knowledge
+19.2 difference
Inst. Following
+7.3 difference
Grok 4.3
ZAYA1-8B
$1.25 / $2.5
$0 / $0
209 t/s
N/A
12.36s
N/A
1M
131K
Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. ZAYA1-8B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Grok 4.3 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 77 to 62. 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 74. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is IFBench, 81.3% to 52.6%. ZAYA1-8B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
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 ZAYA1-8B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Grok 4.3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 131K for ZAYA1-8B.
Grok 4.3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 77 to 62. The biggest single separator in this matchup is IFBench, where the scores are 81.3% and 52.6%.
ZAYA1-8B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.1 versus 53.9. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Grok 4.3 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 81.3 versus 74. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.