Grok 4.5 is xAI's best model for coding — it scores 94/100 vs 87/100 for Grok 4.7, at $2/1M input tokens. Across all providers, Claude Opus 5.5 still leads coding at 100/100 — worth considering if you're not committed to xAI.
The safest xai model for coding default, the cheaper option worth trying first, and the specialist pick — before you read the detail below.
Grok 4.5 is the strongest answer here for xai model for coding — pick it when quality of output matters more than the $2.00/1M/1M input you pay for it.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the cheaper way in for xai model for coding, at $2.00/1M/1M input against Grok 4.5's $2.00/1M/1M.
Grok 4.7 is the fastest of these for xai model for coding — worth it when latency is what the reader notices, not the last few points of reasoning depth.
Grok 4.5 leads xAI's lineup for coding at 94/100 ($2/1M input, 500K context).
Grok 4.5 is the value pick at $2/1M input with a coding score of 94/100.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) is the overall coding leader at 100/100 if provider choice is open.
Choose Grok 4.5 when coding quality is the priority and you're staying on xAI.
Choose Grok 4.5 when token volume matters more than peak quality.
Teams open to other providers should also evaluate Claude Opus 5.5 before committing.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the xai model for coding answer changes when cost, speed, or long-document depth leads the decision.
xAI / Balanced / Oct 10, 2026
Grok 4.6's price with modest coding gains and heavier token use.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
You need a published SWE-bench score, or predictable cost per task — independent testing found its token use roughly doubled.
Where the xai model for coding recommendation shifts once you weigh price or latency differently.
Cost-efficient coding agent — replaced by Grok 4.6 and Grok 4.7.
Grok 4.6's price with modest coding gains and heavier token use.
Finishes agent tasks in half the turns — cheap where it counts.
Retired May 15, 2026 — replaced by Grok 4.6 and Grok 4.7.
List prices and published scores — the numbers this page's pick is built from.
| Model | Input | Output | Est. month | Context | Speed | Coding | Writing | Research |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grok 4.5xAI | $2.00/1M | $6.00/1M | $32 | 500k tokens | Fast | 94 | 72 | 84 |
| Grok 4.7xAI | $2.00/1M | $6.00/1M | $32 | 500k tokens | Fast | 87 | 85 | 88 |
| Grok 4.6xAI | $2.00/1M | $6.00/1M | $32 | 500k tokens | Fast | 86 | 84 | 88 |
| Grok 4xAI | $3.00/1M | $15.00/1M | $60 | 256k tokens | Fast | 80 | 70 | 78 |
Scores out of 100 — how we evaluate models. “Est. month” is 10M in / 2M out at list price: a ceiling, no discounts.
Why each one is on the shortlist for xai model for coding, what it is genuinely good at, and where we would steer you away from it.
Our pick for xai model for coding. It scores 94/100 on the coding axis we weight this page by, and nothing else in this shortlist matches it on output quality.
xAI's first coding- and agent-focused model — the first full-scale deployment of the 1.5T-parameter V9 MoE base, trained with real developer-session data from Cursor.
You need the highest solve rate per attempt or verified low hallucination — Claude Opus 5 is the safer premium pick.
The efficiency play among coding agents. Grok 4.5 wins on cost-per-solved-task and marathon sessions, not raw capability. If your agent bill is the problem, it's the answer; if quality ceiling is the problem, it isn't.
Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the Grok 4.5 page.
The fastest model in this shortlist for xai model for coding. Pick it when turnaround is what your readers or users notice.
Grok 4.7, released September 21, 2026, targets coding and professional knowledge work over multi-hour tasks, with better self-verification and long-context handling than Grok 4.6 at the same $2/$6 price.
You need a published SWE-bench score, or predictable cost per task — independent testing found its token use roughly doubled.
An incremental update. Grok 4.7 keeps Grok 4.6's price and gains a little on coding-quality tests, but independent runs found it spending far more tokens per task. Worth testing if you are already on Grok; not a reason to switch.
Full pricing, benchmark table and release notes on the Grok 4.7 page.
Rounds out the shortlist for xai model for coding at 86/100 on coding.
Finishes agent tasks in half the turns — cheap where it counts. Full Grok 4.6 review →
Rounds out the shortlist for xai model for coding at 80/100 on coding.
Retired May 15, 2026 — replaced by Grok 4.6 and Grok 4.7. Full Grok 4 review →
UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.
Newsletter
We email when the xai model for coding pick changes, when one of these models moves on price, or when something new displaces the current leader.
No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.
Grok 4.5 — it scores 94/100 on coding in this directory, ahead of Grok 4.7 at 87/100. Cost-efficient coding agent — replaced by Grok 4.6 and Grok 4.7.
Not overall. Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) leads the directory for coding at 100/100 vs Grok 4.5's 94/100. Grok 4.5 is the best pick if you're staying within xAI's ecosystem.
Grok 4.5 at $2/1M input tokens (coding score: 94/100). Use it for volume work and reserve Grok 4.5 for the tasks where quality matters most.
$2/1M input tokens and $6/1M output tokens via the API, or through SuperGrok at $30/mo for chat use. Context window: 500K tokens. On a moderate month — 10M input and 2M output tokens — that works out to about $32.00, against $32.00 for Grok 4.5.
Raw ceiling trails the frontier: 64.7% SWE-bench Pro vs Opus 4.8's 69.2%, with a higher reported hallucination rate. 500K context is half the frontier norm, and rates double at ≥200K prompt tokens. Concretely, avoid it if you need the highest solve rate per attempt or verified low hallucination — Claude Opus 5 is the safer premium pick. If none of that is negotiable, Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic) is the cross-provider leader at 100/100.
long-session software engineering — top SWE Marathon score (29% pass@1, ahead of Opus 4.8 and Fable 5), cost-controlled coding agents — ~4.2x fewer output tokens per solved SWE task than Opus 4.8, and live web/X-grounded coding and research with built-in search tools. Its 500K-token context window is the practical limit on how much you can hand it in one go.
They are the same model here — Grok 4.5 is both xAI's strongest coding pick and its best value, so there is no trade-off to make.