@gregpr07: Grok 4.6 is within 1 point of Opus 5 at ~40% lower cost. Across 7 runs, it solved 105/106 hard browser tasks. A little …
Summary
Grok 4.6 achieves near-Opus 5 performance at a 40% lower cost, solving 105/106 hard browser tasks, indicating potential for further advancement with reinforcement learning.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 08/17/26, 08:24 AM
Grok 4.6 is within 1 point of Opus 5 at ~40% lower cost.
Across 7 runs, it solved 105/106 hard browser tasks. A little more RL on hard web tasks and Grok 4.7 is #1 … 👀 https://t.co/BOq2ry8vEN
Similar Articles
@browser_use: Is Grok 4.7 going to be SOTA?
The article discusses Grok 4.6's performance, which is close to Opus 5 in benchmarks at lower cost, and speculates that with more reinforcement learning on browser tasks, Grok 4.7 could become state-of-the-art.
@rohanpaul_ai: Grok 4.6 beat GPT-5.6 Sol on agentic loop efficiency, spending $13.11 versus $20.18 across the same 3 builds. Grok 4.6'…
The article reports an experiment comparing Grok 4.6 and GPT-5.6 Sol on agentic loop efficiency for coding tasks, showing Grok 4.6 is more cost-effective with fewer model calls and effective prompt caching.
@stanine: Hmm. Today, we ran our 2100 scored runs with Grok 4.6. Versus 4.5, the pass rate regressed from 87.3% to 85.9%, and nea…
The article reports on performance regression in Grok 4.6 compared to 4.5, with lower pass rate and higher latency, affecting practical business tasks.
Grok-4.5 on par with gpt-5.5-xhigh in coding at half the cost
Grok-4.5 achieves coding performance comparable to GPT-5.5-xhigh while costing half as much.
@elonmusk: Grok 4.5 is excellent for real-world work
Elon Musk endorses Grok 4.5 for real-world tasks, citing a Ramp test where Grok achieved the highest perfect-extraction rate on 150k business invoices.