Grok 4.6
Grok 4.6 is a SpaceXAI proprietary reasoning model, released 11 Aug 2026. Its best configuration (medium reasoning effort) ranks #55 of 775 on the BenchLeader Index at 64.2 ±4.3, in the upper half. The ± is the point: 135 other configurations score within that range, so they and this one cannot be told apart on quality alone — price and speed are what separate them. It scores highest in composite (78) and lowest in coding (62). At $3.00 per million tokens blended it is pricier than most ranked models. Output speed of 68 tokens per second puts it slower than most, with a first answer in 31.2 s. It has been measured at 5 reasoning-effort settings; this summary describes the best-scoring one, and the tabs above switch between them. Last measured 12 Aug 2026.
- Blended price
- $3.00/M
- $2.00 in · $6.00 out
- Output speed
- 68 tok/s
- measured by Artificial Analysis
- First answer
- 31 s
- first token 3.22 s
- Context
- 500k
- Full answer
- 39 s
- median, reasoning included
- Cost per run
- $1.14
- one full Intelligence Index run
- Released
- 11 Aug 2026
- Overall index64
- Reasoning64
- Coding62
- Agents & tools74
- Knowledge74
- Long context66
- Composite78
Versions
SpaceXAI has shipped 10 models under this name. Each is ranked on its own results; a newer version often has fewer results so far, which holds its index nearer the average until more arrive.
| Model | Released | Index | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grok 4.7high | 21 Sept 2026 | 64.0 | #56 |
| Grok 4.6mediumthis page | 11 Aug 2026 | 64.2 | #55 |
| Grok 4.5high | 8 Jul 2026 | 59.3 | #133 |
| Grok 4.3medium | 17 Apr 2026 | 58.7 | #147 |
| Grok 4.2high | 10 Mar 2026 | – | – |
| Grok 4.20thinking | 17 Feb 2026 | 58.7 | #144 |
| Grok 4.1 | 17 Nov 2025 | 57.4 | #179 |
| Grok 4 | 9 Jul 2025 | 58.0 | #166 |
| Grok 3 | 17 Feb 2025 | 51.5 | #339 |
| Grok 2 | 12 Dec 2024 | 41.9 | #601 |
Reasoning-effort configurations
The same model behaves differently depending on how much it is allowed to think. Each row is one setting, scored only on the benchmarks that were run at that setting. “Not stated” collects results from publishers that did not say which setting they used; for a reasoning model that is usually its thinking mode, but we do not assume it. Pick a setting here or at the top of the page to see its price, speed and category scores.
| Effort | Index | Rank | Speed | First answer | Chat reply cost | Categories |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| low | 59.4 | #131 | 65 tok/s | 7.80 s | $0.0026 | Agents & tools 67 · Coding 53 · Composite 69 · Knowledge 73 · Long context 65 · Reasoning 49 |
| mediumbest | 64.2 | #55 | 68 tok/s | 31 s | $0.0026 | Agents & tools 74 · Coding 62 · Composite 78 · Knowledge 74 · Long context 66 · Reasoning 64 |
| high | 63.0 | #73 | 69 tok/s | 30 s | $0.0026 | Agents & tools 58 · Coding 62 · Composite 79 · Human preference 64 · Knowledge 63 · Long context 65 · Maths 64 · Multimodal 60 · Reasoning 65 |
| xhigh | 62.6 | #82 | 66 tok/s | 45 s | $0.0026 | Agents & tools 65 · Coding 58 · Composite 79 · Knowledge 65 · Long context 66 · Maths 59 · Reasoning 64 |
| not stated | 57.8 | #170 | 56 tok/s | 3.22 s | $0.0026 | Agents & tools 66 · Coding 62 · Composite 58 · Maths 55 · Reasoning 72 |
What more thinking costs
Turning the effort up buys index points and multiplies the bill. Here xhigh costs 4.7× low for +3.2 on the index — 1.4 points per doubling of spend. Compare that with other models.
How its index has moved
8 Sept 2026 to 20 Oct 2026- medium
- high
- xhigh
- low
The index is recomputed from scratch every day, so a line moves when a new benchmark result lands, when a publisher revises a score, or when the models it is normalised against change. Early movement usually means the score is still settling.
Benchmark results
See all LLM benchmarks. One column per reasoning effort. Rank is among every configuration of every model on that benchmark. Hover a score for the run it came from.
Reasoning
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | – | – | 94.0%#12 | 93.2%#20 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| SimpleBencheffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 75.9%#8 | SimpleBench | |
| Arena Hard Prompts | – | – | 1480#64 | – | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoningnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 91.2%#8 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Reasoningnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 90.5%#13 | LiveBench | |
| GPQA Diamond (AA)not in index | 87.9%#92 | 93.5%#14 | 95.0%#4 | 93.5%#14 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA)not in index | 27.6%#171 | 42.1%#73 | 42.9%#61 | 44.1%#53 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals)not in index | – | – | 94.7%#3 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 74.8%#125 | 87.5%#85 | 87.0%#91 | 87.0%#91 | – | ARC Prize | |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 27.6%#128 | 61.3%#77 | 65.1%#69 | 67.1%#64 | – | ARC Prize | |
| ARC-AGI-3 | – | – | – | 2.1%#33 | – | ARC Prize | |
| CritPt | 5.7%#145 | 17.7%#73 | 17.1%#80 | 19.7%#63 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| MysteryMechanismnot in index | – | – | 30.6%#13 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Chess Puzzlesnot in index | – | – | 33.0%#60 | 33.0%#60 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Mystery Game Puzzlesnot in index | – | – | – | 34.0%#24 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LMCAnot in index | – | – | – | 48.5%#76 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| DTBenchnot in index | – | – | – | 97.3%#9 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ForecastBenchnot in index | – | – | – | 65.5%#11 | – | ForecastBench |
Coding
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 49.4%#115 | 55.9%#42 | 56.5%#37 | 53.0%#82 | – | SciCode | |
| WeirdML | – | – | 67.3%#37 | – | – | WeirdML | |
| FrontierCodeeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 48.0%#10 | Cognition | |
| Arena Coding | – | – | 1509#60 | – | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena WebDev | – | – | 1617#24 | – | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Codingnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 89.1%#16 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Codingnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 76.8%#44 | LiveBench | |
| SciCode (AA)not in index | 49.4%#115 | 55.9%#42 | 56.5%#36 | 53.0%#81 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| LiveCodeBench | – | – | 88.2%#7 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| IOI | – | – | 47.6%#27 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| SWE-bench (Vals)not in index | – | – | 95.6%#4 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Code Migrationnot in index | – | – | 44.6%#19 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| ProgramBenchnot in index | – | – | 1.0%#15 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100not in index | – | – | 14.8%#19 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1not in index | – | – | 76.2%#33 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| DeepSWE v1.1not in index | 41.6%#55 | 67.5%#20 | 65.2%#28 | 66.7%#24 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| CursorBenchnot in index | 33.4%#55 | 36.1%#48 | 40.4%#39 | 41.4%#36 | – | Cursor | |
| ALE-Benchnot in index | – | – | – | 1508.1#24 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| FrontierSWEnot in index | – | – | – | 25.3%#14 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)not in index | 3.0%#106 | 13.1%#75 | 21.2%#60 | 17.2%#66 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)not in index | 75.3%#62 | 84.3%#30 | 88.4%#10 | 88.0%#12 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Startrise Frontendnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 72.1%#14 | Startrise |
Agents & tools
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | – | – | 20.3%#71 | – | – | Terminal-Bench | |
| APEX-Agentseffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 65.3%#7 | Mercor | |
| Arena Agent | – | – | – | 0.9#27 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench Long Agenticnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 40.7%#22 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Browsernot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 64.0%#25 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Agentic Codingnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 57.0%#24 | LiveBench | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | – | 78.3%#13 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| GDPval-AA v2.1not in index | 45.5%#73 | 55.6%#28 | 55.9%#26 | 57.3%#19 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | 38.1%#38 | 44.3%#17 | 50.7%#2 | 43.3%#19 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Analyst Agent (AA)not in index | – | – | 41.3%#22 | – | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| CyberBenchnot in index | – | – | 67.7%#29 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Finance Agent v2not in index | – | – | 53.7%#31 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Legal Research Benchnot in index | – | – | 48.1%#10 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| SkillsBenchnot in index | – | – | 55.8%#13 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Tax Agent Benchnot in index | – | – | 33.1%#15 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)not in index | – | – | 17.2%#31 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Terminal-Bench Sciencenot in index | – | – | 11.4%#14 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Time Horizon Index: KSPnot in index | – | – | 5.8%#12 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Vending-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 9047.0#11 | Andon Labs | |
| AutomationBenchnot in index | 53.5%#65 | 63.1%#24 | 66.7%#11 | 67.0%#10 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| GDP.pdf (AA)not in index | 15.8%#91 | 17.8%#77 | 17.0%#86 | 17.2%#82 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| EnterpriseOps-Gymnot in index | – | – | 48.3%#5 | – | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1not in index | – | – | 1534#25 | 1545#23 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)not in index | – | – | 6.2%#34 | – | – | Artificial Analysis |
Maths
| Benchmark | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 66.0%#33 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 31.7%#35 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.8%#30 | 99.2%#16 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| ProofBencheffort not stated | – | – | 51.0%#29 | Vals AI | |
| LiveBench Mathematicsnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | 92.6%#28 | LiveBench | |
| Arena Maths | 1445#80 | – | – | Arena (LMArena) |
Knowledge
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | – | – | 49.3%#29 | 48.9%#30 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysisnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 75.3%#27 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Researchnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 84.5%#9 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0 Data Analysisnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 73.9%#40 | LiveBench | |
| AA-Omniscience | 25.9#49 | 28#40 | 30.5#31 | 29.3#35 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| MMLU-Pro | – | – | 89.4%#11 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| LegalBench | – | – | 86.3%#14 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| CorpFin | – | – | 66.2%#20 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| TaxEval | – | – | 71.1%#81 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| BioMysteryBenchnot in index | – | – | 72.2%#10 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Excel Modeling Benchmarknot in index | – | – | 62.7%#30 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| MedCodenot in index | – | – | 44.7%#40 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| MedScribenot in index | – | – | 86.5%#22 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| Public Benefits Benchnot in index | – | – | 66.8%#16 | – | – | Vals AI | |
| EBR-benchnot in index | – | – | – | 30.5%#13 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| GDP.pdfnot in index | – | – | 16.0%#38 | 17.2%#34 | – | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracynot in index | 43.3%#98 | 41.9%#107 | 48.2%#71 | 43.0%#102 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationnot in index | 69.3%#48 | 76.0%#19 | 65.7%#61 | 76.0%#20 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Instruction following
| Benchmark | high | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Languagenot in indexeffort not stated | – | 83.7%#18 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Instruction Followingnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 71.9%#21 | LiveBench | |
| Arena Instruction Followingnot in index | 1451#64 | – | Arena (LMArena) |
Human preference
| Benchmark | high | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arena Text | 1455#72 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Creative Writingnot in index | 1442#57 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Multi-turnnot in index | 1446#96 | Arena (LMArena) | |
| Arena Longer Queriesnot in index | 1473#57 | Arena (LMArena) |
Multimodal
| Benchmark | high | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arena Vision | 1263#52 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| LiveBench Designnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 79.8%#14 | LiveBench | |
| MortgageTaxnot in index | 64.2%#46 | – | Vals AI | |
| SAGEnot in index | 28.9%#82 | – | Vals AI | |
| Blueprint-Bench 2not in indexeffort not stated | – | 33.2%#12 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub |
Long context
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA-LCR | 80.7%#64 | 81.0%#60 | 80.3%#70 | 81.0%#60 | Artificial Analysis | |
| Arena Documentnot in index | – | – | 1461#24 | – | Arena (LMArena) | |
| MLCRnot in index | – | – | 12.2%#54 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Composite
| Benchmark | low | medium | high | xhigh | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Indexnot in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 156.6#28 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | |
| LiveBench 2.0effort not stated | – | – | – | – | 74.9%#17 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench 1.0not in indexeffort not stated | – | – | – | – | 78.0%#18 | LiveBench | |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 35.1#88 | 42.8#47 | 44.3#40 | 44.2#42 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Where to run it
Every provider serving this model through OpenRouter, with throughput and first-token latency measured on live traffic over the last 30 minutes and each provider’s own price. Purple marks the best in each column.
| Provider | Speed | First token | Input $/M | Output $/M | Context | Quantisation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SpaceXAI | 81 tok/s | 1.70 s | $2.00 | $6.00 | 500k | – |
| SpaceXAI | 72 tok/s | 1.56 s | $2.00 | $6.00 | 500k | – |
What a task costs
Estimates from list price, output speed and time to first answer for the best configuration. “With caching” assumes three-quarters of the input is served from the prompt cache at $0.500 per 1M. Reasoning tokens are not modelled.
| Workload | Tokens in / out | Cost | With caching | Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chat reply | 400 / 300 | $0.0026 | $0.0022 | 35.6 s |
| Summarize a 30-page report | 12,000 / 600 | $0.028 | $0.014 | 40.0 s |
| Code edit | 6,000 / 1,500 | $0.021 | $0.014 | 53.2 s |
| Agentic coding session | 60,000 / 4,000 | $0.144 | $0.076 | 1.5 min |
| Structured extraction | 2,000 / 200 | $0.0052 | $0.0030 | 34.1 s |
More from SpaceXAI
Compare Grok 4.6 with…
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Grok 4.6 vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Grok 4.6 vs Muse Wonder Full
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-6 Astra
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Fable 5.1
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Fable 5
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Opus 5
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- Grok 4.6 vs Muse Wonder
- Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.3
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-6 Sol
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.5
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.5 Pro
- Grok 4.6 vs Kimi K3
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.4
- Grok 4.6 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- Grok 4.6 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- Grok 4.6 vs Grok 4.7
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.3-Codex
- Grok 4.6 vs GLM 5.3
- Grok 4.6 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.4 Pro
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.7
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.8
- Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Max
- Grok 4.6 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
- Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.2
- Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
- Grok 4.6 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
- Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.1
- Grok 4.6 vs Claude Opus 4.6
- Grok 4.6 vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- Grok 4.6 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- Grok 4.6 vs GLM 5.2
- Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.6 Max
See also
Data as of 21 Oct 2026. Compare these configurations.
Cite as: BenchLeader, “Grok 4.6: benchmarks, pricing, speed and rank”, https://www.benchleader.com/models/grok-4-6, data as of 21 Oct 2026.