Claude Opus 5 (Low) vs Grok 4.6 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Low) by Anthropic or Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) scores 4.8 points higher (44.2 vs 39.4) but costs 1.4× as much to run the benchmark ($2242 vs $1561; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Claude Opus 5 (Low).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Low) | Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.4 | 44.2 | +12.2% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 12.2% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,560.91 | $2,241.91 | +43.6% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 43.6% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.44s | 37.86s | +230.9% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 230.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) vs Claude Opus 5 (Low): 12.2% more intelligence, 43.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 230.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Claude Opus 5 (Low)Grok 4.6 (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-low/grok-4-6-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-low/grok-4-6-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill