| Signal | Grok 4 | Delta | R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +33 | |
Benchmarks | 86 | +6 | |
Pricing | 85 | -13 | |
Context window size | 86 | +3 | |
Recency | 84 | +8 | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -60 | |
| Overall Result | 4 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
87
current score
Grok 4
right now
79.7
current score
xAI
DeepSeek
R1 0528 saves you $897.50/month
That's $10770.00/year compared to Grok 4 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Grok 4 | R1 0528 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 87 | 80 | Grok 4 |
| Rank | #12 | #23 | Grok 4 |
| Quality Rank | #12 | #23 | Grok 4 |
| Adoption Rank | #12 | #23 | Grok 4 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 256K | 164K | Grok 4 |
| Pricing | $3.00/$15.00/M | $0.45/$2.15/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 67 | Grok 4 |
| Benchmarks | 86 | 80 | Grok 4 |
| Pricing | 85 | 98 | R1 0528 |
| Context window size | 86 | 83 | Grok 4 |
| Recency | 84 | 76 | Grok 4 |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 80 | R1 0528 |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 87/100 (rank #12), placing it in the top 96% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 80/100 (rank #23), placing it in the top 92% of all 290 models tracked.
Grok 4 has a 7-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably better performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
R1 0528 offers 86% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $39.00/month with R1 0528 vs $270.00/month with Grok 4 - a $231.00 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. R1 0528 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (256K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($2.15/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (87/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Grok 4 has a moderate advantage with a 7.299999999999997-point lead in composite score. It wins on more signal dimensions, but R1 0528 has specific strengths that could make it the better choice for certain workflows.
Best for Quality
Grok 4
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
R1 0528
86% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Grok 4
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Grok 4
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Grok 4
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by xAI
| Capability | Grok 4 | R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
xAI
DeepSeek
R1 0528 saves you $20.01/month
That's 86% cheaper than Grok 4 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Grok 4 | R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 256K | 164K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | 65,536 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Jul 9, 2025 | May 28, 2025 |
Grok 4 scores 87/100 (rank #12) compared to R1 0528's 80/100 (rank #23), giving it a 7-point advantage. Grok 4 is the stronger overall choice, though R1 0528 may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Grok 4 is ranked #12 and R1 0528 is ranked #23 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
R1 0528 is cheaper at $2.15/M output tokens vs Grok 4's $15.00/M output tokens - 7.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: Grok 4 at $3.00/M vs R1 0528 at $0.45/M.
Grok 4 has a larger context window of 256,000 tokens compared to R1 0528's 163,840 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.