Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Grok 4.5

Anthropic · US  |  xAI · US · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Claude Sonnet 4.6 for best value in the claude family or everyday professional work. Pick Grok 4.5 for cheap, token-efficient agentic coding — about gpt-5.5-codex quality at roughly half the cost or extreme token efficiency — around 4x fewer output tokens per task than opus 4.8. On a tight budget at scale, Grok 4.5 is the value pick.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic) and Grok 4.5 (xAI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is opus-class quality at lower cost; superseded as the default Sonnet by Claude Sonnet 5 (June 2026). Grok 4.5 is xAI's first coding-focused model — pitched as Opus-class but faster, more token-efficient, and cheaper, undercutting GPT-5.5-Codex. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecClaude Sonnet 4.6Grok 4.5
ProviderAnthropic (US) xAI (US)
ReleasedFebruary 17, 2026 July 8, 2026
Context window1M (~1,500 pages) 500K (~750 pages)
Price (in/out)$3/$15 per 1M tokens $2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?No — API only No — API only
Modalitiestext, image, code text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified79.6% Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Best value in the Claude family

Claude Sonnet 4.6

A core design strength of Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Everyday professional work

Claude Sonnet 4.6

A core design strength of Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Long-document analysis

Claude Sonnet 4.6

A core design strength of Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Cheap, token-efficient agentic coding — about GPT-5.5-Codex quality at roughly half the cost

Grok 4.5

A core design strength of Grok 4.5.

Extreme token efficiency — around 4x fewer output tokens per task than Opus 4.8

Grok 4.5

A core design strength of Grok 4.5.

In-IDE coding, trained on real Cursor developer sessions and shipped natively in Cursor

Grok 4.5

A core design strength of Grok 4.5.

Lowest cost at scale

Grok 4.5

At $2/$6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Largest single-prompt input

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Its 1M window is about 2× larger, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Grok 4.5

At $2/$6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 4.6, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.

Anyone whose priority is best value in the claude family

Claude Sonnet 4.6

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is cheap, token-efficient agentic coding — about gpt-5.5-codex quality at roughly half the cost

Grok 4.5

That is its strongest area.

Claude Sonnet 4.6: where it fits

Opus-class quality at lower cost; superseded as the default Sonnet by Claude Sonnet 5 (June 2026). Released February 17, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for best value in the Claude family, everyday professional work, long-document analysis, and coding at lower cost than Opus.

Its trade-offs are real: trails Opus on the hardest agentic tasks, and not an open-weight option. At $3 in / $15 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

Grok 4.5: where it fits

XAI's first coding-focused model — pitched as Opus-class but faster, more token-efficient, and cheaper, undercutting GPT-5.5-Codex. Released July 8, 2026 by xAI, it is built for cheap, token-efficient agentic coding — about GPT-5.5-Codex quality at roughly half the cost, extreme token efficiency — around 4x fewer output tokens per task than Opus 4.8, in-IDE coding, trained on real Cursor developer sessions and shipped natively in Cursor, and top-tier placement on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index.

Its trade-offs: smaller 500K context (halved from the 1M generation), with pricing that doubles above 200K tokens, and eU launch delayed; no open weights. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Grok 4.5 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Grok 4.5 costs less per token; Claude Sonnet 4.6 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Sonnet 4.6 for best value in the claude family, Grok 4.5 for cheap, token-efficient agentic coding — about gpt-5.5-codex quality at roughly half the cost. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.

Want both Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Grok 4.5 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Grok 4.5 better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Grok 4.5, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 4.6 leans toward best value in the claude family while Grok 4.5 leans toward cheap, token-efficient agentic coding — about gpt-5.5-codex quality at roughly half the cost, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Grok 4.5?

Grok 4.5 is cheaper — $3/$15 per 1M tokens vs $2/$6 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.5× apart on input.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 — 1M vs 500K, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Grok 4.5 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 4.6, Grok 4.5 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Grok 4.5?

Grok 4.5 — released July 8, 2026, about 5 months after Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.