Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 5.5vsGrok 4.6
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsGrok 4.6

Grok 4.6 is cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5 at $2/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.6 compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5Grok 4.6
Input price$4/M tokens$2/M tokens
Output price$20/M tokens$6/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens500K tokens
WeightsClosedClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Aug 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Claude Opus 5.53,435 words
The Transistor in 1920: A Counterfactual Through 1980 First, a Reality Check on the Premise A transistor "invented" in 1920 would not have changed the world in 1920. The actual 1947 transistor rested on three foundations that did not exist yet: Quantum theory of solids.
Read the full answer
Grok 4.6838 words
Early transistors (1920s–1930s) would accelerate electronics, communications, and computing by ~20–25 years relative to actual history, with compounding effects by WWII, but constrained by contemporaneous materials science, manufacturing, vacuum-tube infrastructure, and non-electronic fields like rocketry, chemistry…
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Claude Opus 5.52,253 words
"Hive & Tide" Langoustine, Beeswax, White Chocolate & Oscietra Caviar, Hay-Baked Celeriac, Fermented Green Strawberry, Sea Buckthorn I. The Concept Most coastal menus celebrate the meeting of sea and land. This dish is about a stranger, quieter meeting: the meadow and the seabed, the bee and the langoustine.
Read the full answer
Grok 4.6711 words
Lunar Embrace This dish evokes a moonlit Japanese coastline at the precise instant when receding tide exposes both ocean treasures and forest-floor secrets. The unexpected marriage of sweet-briny Hokkaido scallop, molasses-deep black garlic, and creamy white chocolate creates a savory-sweet umami bridge rarely…
Read the full answer

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 5.5900 words
HarborTech Services: 5-Year LBO Underwriting Conventions: $m. Interest is charged on beginning-of-year balances, which avoids circularity. Term Loan (TL) amortization is 1% of the original $480m, or $4.8m per year. Mezz PIK accrues to principal. All FCF after mandatory debt service sweeps to the TL.
Read the full answer
Grok 4.6579 words
Entry (end-FY2025) EV = 12.0 × $120m = $1,440.0m Fees = 2% × 1,440 = $28.8m (equity-funded) Uses = $1,468.8m Debt = 5.5× = $660.0m (TL $480.0m / Mezz $180.0m) Sponsor equity = $808.8m opening cash = $0 Convention: cash interest and PIK on beginning balances; 1% original TL amort = $4.8m/yr; optional sweep of all…
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

Claude Opus 5.51,853 words
The Next 48 Hours: CEO Action Plan The Core Decision We disclose. The question is how to do it well, not whether. Before the schedule, here are the three facts that drive every decision below. 1. The harm is concrete.
Read the full answer
Grok 4.6742 words
Immediate priority: patient safety and legal/regulatory compliance come first. Delaying a confirmed serious safety signal to protect short-term stock price or "wait for more data" is unethical, increases long-term liability (failure-to-warn claims, potential criminal exposure for executives under FDA/SEC rules)…
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Claude Opus 5.5936 words
The 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch "Decodes neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy. Works with any language, any device." (Slide 3) Why it's weak: It far exceeds the published state of the art. The best results for thought-to-text come from invasive implants.
Read the full answer
Grok 4.6966 words
The three weakest claims are the “before you think it” vision line, the 94% / any-language technical claim, and the $180B TAM. Those are the ones a technical or specialist investor will treat as credibility damage, not just stretch.
Read the full answer

Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)

You are writing an internal investment committee memo for a long/short equity fund. Company (fictional): LedgerLift (ticker: LLLT) – B2B…

Claude Opus 5.51,335 words
IC Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT): Short, Starter Size, Hedged vs. Peer Basket Fictional exercise. Not investment advice. Recommendation Short (starter size, 1–1.5% gross), paired against a long basket of Peers A, B and C. 12-month price target range: $36–42 (current price $46, implying 9–22% downside). Thesis.
Read the full answer
Grok 4.6773 words
IC MEMO: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Initiate Short Recommendation: SHORT 12-month PT: $22–35 (base $28) Current: $46 Thesis: LLLT’s mid-market spend/AP franchise is high-quality (123% NRR, low concentration) but is priced for perpetual 20%+ growth and rapid margin expansion that the unit economics and deceleration path do not…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
Grok 4.6
Grok 4.6Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Claude Opus 5.5 has the edge: newer, bigger context window.

Grok 4.6 costs 3.3x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 5.5
Input
$4.00
Output
$20.00
Grok 4.6
Input
$2.00
2.0× cheaper
Output
$6.00
3.3× cheaper

Grok 4.6 is cheaper on both: 2.0× input, 3.3× output.

Where to run it

6 hosts, cheapest first

Claude Opus 5.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·99.8% upAzure AI Foundry$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upAnthropic$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upGoogle Vertex AI$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% up
Grok 4.62 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
xAI$2.00 in·$6.00 out·500k·99.6% upAmazon Bedrock$2.20 in·$6.60 out·500k·100% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while Grok 4.6 is developed by xAI. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Grok 4.6's 500K. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.6 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/M input tokens and Grok 4.6 costs $2/M input tokens. Grok 4.6 is $2.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5.5 and Grok 4.6 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Grok 4.6 logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Grok 4.6 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Grok 4.6 logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Grok 4.6 vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Grok 4.6 logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Grok 4.6 vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Fable 5.1 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1Same lab
Grok 4.6 logoGrok 4.5 logo
Grok 4.6 vs Grok 4.5Version compare
Grok 4.6 logoGrok 4.7 logo
Grok 4.6 vs Grok 4.7Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoLing 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Same size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoLing 3.0 Flash Sante (free) logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free)Same size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoLing 3.0 Flash VL (free) logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)Same size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoLlama 3 70B logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Llama 3 70BSame size

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
Grok 4.6 logo
Grok 4.658 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed