Roboflow

Grok 4.5 vs Grok 4.6

Compare Grok 4.5 and Grok 4.6 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.

Compare Grok 4.5 vs Grok 4.6 live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GrokGrok 4.5
Run to compare this model.
GrokGrok 4.6
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Grok 4.6 on Vision Evals

Grok 4.6 scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Counting, where Grok 4.6 leads 65.8% to 59.5%.

Overall, Grok 4.5 averages 65.8% (#40 of 59) against 68.7% (#31 of 59) for Grok 4.6.

Grok 4.5 is cheaper ($0.0084 vs $0.0097 per sample), while Grok 4.6 is faster (17.5s vs 20.8s per sample).

Grok 4.5Grok 4.6

Grok 4.5 vs Grok 4.6 Comparison Table

Evals updated September 27, 2026Pricing updated September 27, 2026

PropertyGrok 4.5Grok 4.6
OrganizationSpaceXAISpaceXAI
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Aug 2026
Context Window500K500K
Parameters
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$2.00
Output $/1M$6.00$6.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
65.8%
68.7%
Avg cost / sample$0.0084$0.0097
Avg speed / sample20.75s17.55s
By task
Object Detection (low)
19.0%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 18.0 to 19.6
$0.011
23.8%
±2.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 20.2 to 25.9
$0.013
Object Detection (high)
17.8%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 17.5 to 18.0
$0.020
24.0%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 23.1 to 25.1
$0.041
Counting (low)
59.5%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 62.2
$0.0065
65.8%
±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 70.3
$0.0079
Counting (high)
57.7%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 60.8
$0.012
56.8%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 58.1
$0.027
Identification (low)
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0046
84.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0055
Identification (high)
85.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0067
85.4%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.015
OCR (low)
92.1%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.5
$0.0068
91.8%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.5 to 92.1
$0.0091
OCR (high)
92.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.9
$0.012
91.6%
±0.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.4 to 91.7
$0.023
Data Extraction (low)
83.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 84.5
$0.0044
85.6%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.5 to 86.6
$0.0050
Data Extraction (high)
81.8%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 83.5
$0.0061
85.6%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.5 to 86.6
$0.0090
Reasoning (low)
57.6%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 58.9
$0.0082
61.1%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.6 to 62.3
$0.0093
Reasoning (high)
59.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.0 to 62.3
$0.019
63.8%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.3 to 66.2
$0.032

Grok 4.5 vs Grok 4.6: Overview

Grok 4.5

Grok 4.5 is a proprietary reasoning model from SpaceXAI (xAI) that accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window. xAI positions it as a model for coding, agentic software work, and knowledge tasks, and states it was trained in the company's Memphis data centers on datasets spanning science, engineering, and mathematics. Its reinforcement learning stage covers hundreds of thousands of multi step software engineering tasks scored by automated checks and model based grading, and training is reported to have run on tens of thousands of NVIDIA GB300 GPUs using an asynchronous scheme in which multi hour agentic rollouts continue while learning proceeds in parallel, targeting long horizon autonomous operation rather than single turn inference.

For vision, the model consumes JPEG and PNG images in any order relative to text prompts, covering visual question answering, description of chart and document imagery, and reading text rendered inside a scene. Reasoning effort is configurable, and the model supports function calling and structured outputs, so image inputs can be interleaved with tool calls inside agent loops. xAI has not published a technical report, architecture details, or parameter count, and reported mixture of experts sizing figures come from secondary coverage rather than official documentation.

Grok 4.6

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, and it can also return object detection boxes as text coordinates when prompted.

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 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 68.7% (#31 of 59) against 65.8% (#40 of 59) for Grok 4.5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Counting benchmark at low effort, Grok 4.6 leads with 65.8% against 59.5%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Grok 4.5 is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0084 per sample against $0.0097. Grok 4.5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $6.00 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.

Grok 4.6 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 17.5s per inference against 20.8s. 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 image captioning and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.