Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok 4.6
Compare Gemini 2.5 Pro and Grok 4.6 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Image Captioning.
Compare Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok 4.6 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Compare image classification labels and confidence scores side-by-side.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok 4.6 on Vision Evals
Grok 4.6 scores higher on 3 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.6% to 42.4%.
Overall, Gemini 2.5 Pro averages 66.0% (#22 of 30) against 67.8% (#17 of 30) for Grok 4.6.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is both cheaper ($0.0050 vs $0.0069 per sample) and faster (6.1s vs 7.4s per sample).
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok 4.6 Comparison Table
Evals updated August 14, 2026Pricing updated August 15, 2026
| Property | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | SpaceXAI | |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jun 2025 | Aug 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 500K |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.25 | $2.00 |
| Output $/1M | $10.00 | $6.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 66.0% | 67.8% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0050 | $0.0069 |
| Avg speed / sample | 6.11s | 7.39s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection | 33.7% $0.010 | 20.2% $0.0068 |
| Counting | 52.7% $0.0012 | 70.3% $0.0074 |
| Identification | 93.8% $0.0012 | 78.1% $0.0048 |
| OCR | 88.8% $0.0047 | 92.0% $0.0086 |
| Data Extraction | 84.5% $0.0013 | 84.5% $0.0042 |
| Reasoning (low) | 42.4% $0.0013 | 61.6% $0.0087 |
| Reasoning (high) | 62.3% $0.011 | 61.6% $0.027 |
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok 4.6: Overview
Gemini 2.5 Pro, released on June 17, 2025, is Google DeepMind’s most capable model in the Gemini 2.5 family, optimized for deep reasoning, coding, and complex multimodal tasks. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and PDFs as input and outputs text. The model supports 1 million input tokens with an output capacity of up to 65K tokens, enabling large-scale comprehension of datasets, codebases, and technical documents. Its training knowledge extends to January 2025.
Pro outperforms earlier Gemini 2.0 models across benchmarks, including agentic coding tasks where it achieved ~63.8% on SWE-Bench Verified. It supports structured outputs, function calling, code execution, search grounding, and URL context, making it well-suited for enterprise, STEM, and developer workflows. However, it does not currently support image or audio generation in its stable release, and its higher computational cost and latency make it less efficient than Flash or Flash-Lite. It is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, and Vertex AI.
Grok 4.6 is a proprietary reasoning model from xAI aimed at long-running agentic workflows, coding, and knowledge work. It accepts text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window and a knowledge cutoff of February 1, 2026. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning budget with low, medium, high, and xhigh settings, where high is the default, and it supports function calling, structured outputs, web and X search, and code execution as documented tool behaviors. Its visual capability covers interpreting images supplied alongside text prompts, which places it in the visual question answering and document understanding family rather than producing pixel level outputs such as boxes or masks.
xAI characterizes Grok 4.6 as the result of an extended post-training run over the Grok 4.5 lineage rather than a new pretrained base. The described recipe combines curated model-generated reasoning and technical data, engineering data, a revised optimizer, regenerated supervised fine-tuning trajectories, and reinforcement learning across agent environments spanning knowledge work, coding, kernel optimization, web development, and computer-aided design. Parameter count and architecture specifics are not disclosed. Independent measurement from Artificial Analysis places the model at 61 on its Intelligence Index, five points above Grok 4.5.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Grok 4.6 performed better. It scores higher on 3 of the six vision tasks and averages 67.8% (#17 of 30) against 66.0% (#22 of 30) for Gemini 2.5 Pro. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Grok 4.6 leads with 61.6% against 42.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0050 per sample against $0.0069. Gemini 2.5 Pro is priced at $1.25 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output; Grok 4.6 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $6.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.1s per inference against 7.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for open prompts and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.