Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Grok 4.6 vs Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) benchmark

Name: Grok 4.6 vs Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Grok 4.6 (xAI) and Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) (Google) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. 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

xAI

Grok 4.6

xAI Aug 12 2026 post-training refresh of Grok 4.5. Same $2/$6 API price, 500k context, stronger agentic traces.

Elo 1,592$6/1M out

Google

Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

Google high-speed multimodal generative model delivering top Elo performance at half the latency and cost of Pro.

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.

Grok 4.6 (10)vsNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) (0)

Grok 4.6: 10W (100%)Overall: Grok 4.6Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W (0%)

← Grok 4.6Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) →

Grok 4.6 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

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

Preference Elo

1,592vs—

Coding Elo

1,568vs—

SWE-bench

69.1%vs—

LiveBench

71.4%vs—

GPQA Diamond

84.6%vs—

Grok 4.6: 5WNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W

Grok 4.6 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

118 tok/svs—

Time to first token

195 msvs—

Grok 4.6: 2WNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W

Grok 4.6 (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$6/1Mvs—

Input price

$2/1Mvs—

Context window

500kvs—

Grok 4.6: 3WNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W

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 AdvantageNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) 5/6

Preference Elo

No shared data

Throughput Speed

No shared data

Price Efficiency

No shared data

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,592

EloHigh is better

—

Code Elo

High is better

1,568

Code EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

71.4%

LiveBenchHigh is better

—

SWE-bench

High is better

69.1%

SWE-benchHigh is better

—

GPQA

High is better

84.6%

GPQAHigh is better

—

TTFT

Low is better

195 ms

TTFTLow is better

—

Speed

High is better

118 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

—

In $

Low is better

$2/1M

In $Low is better

—

Out $

Low is better

$6/1M

Out $Low is better

—

Context

High is better

500k

ContextHigh is better

—

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatinsufficient data

Need list prices.

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGinsufficient data

Need context sizes.

Screenshots / visioninsufficient data

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

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	insufficient data	Need list prices.
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	insufficient data	Need context sizes.
Screenshots / vision	insufficient data	Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (undefined).

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

compareAug 12, 2026

Grok vs ChatGPT: price and Elo, not a personality contest

Brand hub remaps to top xAI vs top OpenAI. After Aug 12 that is Grok 4.6 vs Sol.

launchAug 12, 2026

Grok 4.6 (Aug 12): post-training refresh, same $2/$6 list

xAI’s Aug 12 2026 refresh of Grok 4.5. 500k context. The Grok vs ChatGPT hub remaps here.

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/grok-4-6-vs-nano-banana-2/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

xAI

Grok 4.6

Elo 1,592

LiveBench71.4%

SWE-bench69.1%

Speed118 tok/s

Output cost$6/1M

Google

Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

Elo n/a

LiveBench—

SWE-bench—

Speed—

Output cost—

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Grok 4.6 or Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)?: We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Grok 4.6 or Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)?: SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: List prices are missing for at least one model.
Which is faster, Grok 4.6 or Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)?: We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?: Context window is missing for at least one model.
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. Grok 4.6 and Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Grok 4.6 matchups →|All Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) matchups →

Grok 4.6 vs Grok 4 (previous grok)Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) vs Nano Banana Pro (Gemini 3 Pro Image) (previous nano-banana)Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) vs Nano Banana 2 Lite (next nano-banana)Gemini 3.6 Pro vs Grok 4.6 Gemini 3 Pro vs Grok 4.6 Gemini 3.7 Flash vs Grok 4.6

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Grok 4.6 (10)vsNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) (0)

Grok 4.6: 10W (100%)Overall: Grok 4.6Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W (0%)

← Grok 4.6Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) →

Grok 4.6 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

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

Preference Elo

1,592vs—

Coding Elo

1,568vs—

SWE-bench

69.1%vs—

LiveBench

71.4%vs—

GPQA Diamond

84.6%vs—

Grok 4.6: 5WNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W

Grok 4.6 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

118 tok/svs—

Time to first token

195 msvs—

Grok 4.6: 2WNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W

Grok 4.6 (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$6/1Mvs—

Input price

$2/1Mvs—

Context window

500kvs—

Grok 4.6: 3WNano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image): 0W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatinsufficient data

Need list prices.

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGinsufficient data

Need context sizes.

Screenshots / visioninsufficient data

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

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	insufficient data	Need list prices.
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	insufficient data	Need context sizes.
Screenshots / vision	insufficient data	Both accept images. Defaulting to the higher-Elo side (undefined).

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Grok 4.6 or Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)?

We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.

Which is better at coding, Grok 4.6 or Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)?

SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

List prices are missing for at least one model.

Which is faster, Grok 4.6 or Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)?

We do not have TTFT for both models.

Which has the larger context window?

Context window is missing for at least one model.

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. Grok 4.6 and Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) 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

No shared data

No shared data

No shared data

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Grok vs ChatGPT: price and Elo, not a personality contest

Grok 4.6 (Aug 12): post-training refresh, same $2/$6 list

Grok 4 remains the previous xAI flagship on this catalog

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Grok 4.6

Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

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

No shared data

No shared data

No shared data

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Grok vs ChatGPT: price and Elo, not a personality contest

Grok 4.6 (Aug 12): post-training refresh, same $2/$6 list

Grok 4 remains the previous xAI flagship on this catalog

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Grok 4.6

Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image)

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons