Pick Grok Code Fast 1 for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 or low-latency code generation and terminal tasks. Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. Choose Laguna XS 2.1 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Grok Code Fast 1 if you want a managed API.
Grok Code Fast 1 (xAI) and Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Grok Code Fast 1 is xAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Laguna XS 2.1 is about 2× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: Laguna XS 2.1 is the newer model by about 10 months (released July 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Grok Code Fast 1
Laguna XS 2.1
Provider
xAI (US)
Poolside (US)
Released
August 28, 2025
July 2, 2026
Context window
256K (~384 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
70.9%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50: Grok Code Fast 1 — Laguna XS 2.1 is comparatively weak here — weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise
Low-latency code generation and terminal tasks: Grok Code Fast 1 — Grok Code Fast 1 lists low-latency code generation and terminal tasks among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
High-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality: Grok Code Fast 1 — Grok Code Fast 1 lists high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — Grok Code Fast 1 is comparatively weak here — xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime: Laguna XS 2.1 — Open weights make this possible at all — Grok Code Fast 1 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price: Laguna XS 2.1 — At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok Code Fast 1 ($0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Lowest cost at scale: Laguna XS 2.1 — At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Laguna XS 2.1 — At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok Code Fast 1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Laguna XS 2.1 — Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: Laguna XS 2.1 — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Grok Code Fast 1 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50: Grok Code Fast 1 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — That is its strongest area.
Grok Code Fast 1: where it fits
XAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Released August 28, 2025 by xAI, it is built for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, low-latency code generation and terminal tasks, high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality, and a 256K window sized for real codebases.
Its trade-offs are real: text and code only — no image, audio or video input, xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score, a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner, and narrow focus — built for code, not general knowledge work. At $0.2 in / $1.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Laguna XS 2.1 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Grok Code Fast 1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok Code Fast 1 or Laguna XS 2.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Grok Code Fast 1, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Grok Code Fast 1 leans toward fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 while Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Grok Code Fast 1 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Laguna XS 2.1 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Grok Code Fast 1 is API-metered at $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Grok Code Fast 1 and Laguna XS 2.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Grok Code Fast 1, Laguna XS 2.1 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, Grok Code Fast 1 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Laguna XS 2.1 — released July 2, 2026, about 10 months after Grok Code Fast 1.
Grok Code Fast 1 vs Laguna XS 2.1
xAI · US | Poolside · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Grok Code Fast 1 for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 or low-latency code generation and terminal tasks. Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. Choose Laguna XS 2.1 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Grok Code Fast 1 if you want a managed API.
Grok Code Fast 1 (xAI) and Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Grok Code Fast 1 is xAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Laguna XS 2.1 is about 2× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
▸Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: Laguna XS 2.1 is the newer model by about 10 months (released July 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Grok Code Fast 1
Laguna XS 2.1
Provider
xAI (US)
Poolside (US)
Released
August 28, 2025
July 2, 2026
Context window
256K (~384 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
70.9%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50
Grok Code Fast 1
Laguna XS 2.1 is comparatively weak here — weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise
Low-latency code generation and terminal tasks
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists low-latency code generation and terminal tasks among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
High-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality
Grok Code Fast 1
Grok Code Fast 1 lists high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters
Laguna XS 2.1
Grok Code Fast 1 is comparatively weak here — xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime
Laguna XS 2.1
Open weights make this possible at all — Grok Code Fast 1 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price
Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok Code Fast 1 ($0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Lowest cost at scale
Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Grok Code Fast 1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Laguna XS 2.1
Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Laguna XS 2.1
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Grok Code Fast 1 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50
→ Grok Code Fast 1
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters
→ Laguna XS 2.1
That is its strongest area.
Grok Code Fast 1: where it fits
XAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Released August 28, 2025 by xAI, it is built for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, low-latency code generation and terminal tasks, high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality, and a 256K window sized for real codebases.
Its trade-offs are real: text and code only — no image, audio or video input, xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score, a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner, and narrow focus — built for code, not general knowledge work. At $0.2 in / $1.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Laguna XS 2.1 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Grok Code Fast 1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Grok Code Fast 1 and Laguna XS 2.1 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.
Is Grok Code Fast 1 or Laguna XS 2.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Grok Code Fast 1, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Grok Code Fast 1 leans toward fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 while Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Grok Code Fast 1 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Laguna XS 2.1 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Grok Code Fast 1 is API-metered at $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Grok Code Fast 1 and Laguna XS 2.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Grok Code Fast 1, Laguna XS 2.1 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, Grok Code Fast 1 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Laguna XS 2.1 — released July 2, 2026, about 10 months after Grok Code Fast 1.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.