whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
Anthropic

Claude Opus 4.8

VS
xAI

Grok 4.20

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Claude Opus 4.8 is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 17.4% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: Grok 4.20 is 3.3x cheaper to run and delivers 4.8x faster throughput. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, Grok 4.20 offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Claude Opus 4.8 fully justifies the cost.

Model Specs

Claude Opus 4.8

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+17.4%)
69.2%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+3.6%)
93.6%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$10.00Input: $5.00 | Output: $25.00
Speed
48.1 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Grok 4.20

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
51.8%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
90%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)3.3x cheaper
$3.00Input: $2.00 | Output: $6.00
Speed4.8x faster
233 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

Grok 4.20 is cheaper than Claude Opus 4.8. Grok 4.20 has a blended cost of $3.00/1M tokens, which is about 3.3x cheaper than Claude Opus 4.8 at $10.00/1M tokens.

Grok 4.20 is faster than Claude Opus 4.8. Grok 4.20 generates 233 tokens per second (tps) compared to Claude Opus 4.8 which generates 48.1 tokens per second.

Claude Opus 4.8 is better for coding tasks. It scores 69.2% on coding evaluations (swe-bench-pro) compared to Grok 4.20 which scores 51.8%.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard