Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 1, 2026

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Grok 4 benchmark

Name: Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Grok 4 AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude 3.5 Sonnet (Anthropic) and Grok 4 (xAI) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 1, 2026. On preference Elo, Grok 4 is ahead by 208 points (1,488 vs 1,280; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Grok 4 resolves 58.6% versus 49% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). Grok 4 streams faster (98 tok/s) while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the cheaper output token ($15/1M). Grok 4 has the larger context window (256k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

2024 workhorse. Still a high-intent compare against GPT-4o.

Elo 1,280$15/1M out

xAI

Grok 4

Previous xAI flagship.

Elo 1,488$15/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (0)vsGrok 4 (7)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0W (0%)Overall: Grok 4Grok 4: 7W (100%)

← Claude 3.5 Sonnet2 tiesGrok 4 →

Grok 4 (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,280vs1,488

Coding Elo

—vs—

SWE-bench

49%vs58.6%

LiveBench

52.1%vs64.1%

GPQA Diamond

65%vs79%

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0WGrok 4: 4W

Grok 4 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

80 tok/svs98 tok/s

Time to first token

280 msvs230 ms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0WGrok 4: 2W

Grok 4 (1/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$15/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$3/1M

Context window

200kvs256k

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0WGrok 4: 1W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageGrok 4 5/6

Preference Elo

Grok 4

208 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Grok 4

18 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Same token price

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,280

EloHigh is better

1,488+16%

LiveBench

High is better

52.1%

LiveBenchHigh is better

64.1%+23%

SWE-bench

High is better

49%

SWE-benchHigh is better

58.6%+20%

GPQA

High is better

65%

GPQAHigh is better

79%+22%

TTFT

Low is better

280 ms

TTFTLow is better

230 ms+22%

Speed

High is better

80 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

98 tok/s+23%

In $

Low is better

$3/1M

In $Low is better

$3/1M

Out $

Low is better

$15/1M

Out $Low is better

$15/1M

Context

High is better

200k

ContextHigh is better

256k+28%

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet$330.00 / mo

In: $105.00Out: $225.00

Grok 4$330.00 / mo

In: $105.00Out: $225.00

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Grok 4:Pick Grok 4 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Claude 3.5 Sonnet:Pick Claude 3.5 Sonnet when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Grok 4:Pick Grok 4 when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGrok 4

Higher SWE-bench (58.6%).

High-volume chatClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Lower output list price ($15/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIGrok 4

Lower TTFT (230 ms).

Long-document RAGGrok 4

Larger window (256k).

Screenshots / visionGrok 4

Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Grok 4).

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Grok 4	Higher SWE-bench (58.6%).
High-volume chat	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Lower output list price ($15/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Grok 4	Lower TTFT (230 ms).
Long-document RAG	Grok 4	Larger window (256k).
Screenshots / vision	Grok 4	Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Grok 4).

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchJul 10, 2025

Grok 4 remains the previous xAI flagship on this catalog

2025-07 row. 4.6 is the buy. We keep 4 so upgrade pairs and old inbound links resolve.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-3-5-sonnet-vs-grok-4/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Elo 1,280

LiveBench52.1%

SWE-bench49%

Speed80 tok/s

Output cost$15/1M

xAI

Grok 4

Elo 1,488

LiveBench64.1%

SWE-bench58.6%

Speed98 tok/s

Output cost$15/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4?: Grok 4 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,488). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4?: Grok 4 leads SWE-bench at 58.6% vs 49%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Claude 3.5 Sonnet output tokens are $15/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4?: Grok 4 has the lower time-to-first-token (230 ms vs 280 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Grok 4 accepts 256k tokens versus 200k.
Can I self-host either model?: Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Grok 4 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude 3.5 Sonnet matchups →|All Grok 4 matchups →

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet (next sonnet)Grok 4 vs Grok 3 (previous grok)Grok 4 vs Grok 4.6 (next grok)Claude Opus 4.5 vs Grok 4 Claude Opus 4.6 vs Grok 4 Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Grok 4

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Grok 4 benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet (0)vsGrok 4 (7)

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0W (0%)Overall: Grok 4Grok 4: 7W (100%)

← Claude 3.5 Sonnet2 tiesGrok 4 →

Grok 4 (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,280vs1,488

Coding Elo

—vs—

SWE-bench

49%vs58.6%

LiveBench

52.1%vs64.1%

GPQA Diamond

65%vs79%

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0WGrok 4: 4W

Grok 4 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

80 tok/svs98 tok/s

Time to first token

280 msvs230 ms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0WGrok 4: 2W

Grok 4 (1/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$15/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$3/1M

Context window

200kvs256k

Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 0WGrok 4: 1W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGrok 4

Higher SWE-bench (58.6%).

High-volume chatClaude 3.5 Sonnet

Lower output list price ($15/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIGrok 4

Lower TTFT (230 ms).

Long-document RAGGrok 4

Larger window (256k).

Screenshots / visionGrok 4

Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Grok 4).

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Grok 4	Higher SWE-bench (58.6%).
High-volume chat	Claude 3.5 Sonnet	Lower output list price ($15/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Grok 4	Lower TTFT (230 ms).
Long-document RAG	Grok 4	Larger window (256k).
Screenshots / vision	Grok 4	Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (Grok 4).

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4?

Grok 4 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,488). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4?

Grok 4 leads SWE-bench at 58.6% vs 49%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet output tokens are $15/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Grok 4?

Grok 4 has the lower time-to-first-token (230 ms vs 280 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Grok 4 accepts 256k tokens versus 200k.

Can I self-host either model?

Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Grok 4 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Grok 4

Grok 4

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Grok 4 remains the previous xAI flagship on this catalog

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Grok 4

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Grok 4

Grok 4

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Grok 4 remains the previous xAI flagship on this catalog

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Grok 4

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons