GPT-5.3-Codex is cheaper than Grok 4 at $1.75/M vs $3/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Good evening, everybody! I’ve reached that age where my body sends me passive-aggressive emails. Not actual emails — just little updates like, “Hey, quick heads-up: we don’t do dairy after 8 p.m. anymore.” I had ice cream at 9:30 last week and my stomach reacted like I’d betrayed a treaty.
Grok 4: Below is a 3-minute stand-up comedy routine I've written. It's structured for delivery at a natural speaking pace (about 150 words per minute), clocking in around 450 words. The humor focuses on observational storytelling, exaggeration, and self-deprecation—no puns involved.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great counterfactual. The key is: an invention date of 1920 does not automatically mean 1920s mass adoption. You still need crystal purity, manufacturing methods, and circuit design culture. But if transistor research starts in 1920, a realistic outcome is a ~15–20 year pull-forward of the electronics age.
Grok 4: Below is a detailed, speculative analysis of the hypothetical scenario where the transistor is invented in 1920 (perhaps by an inventor like Julius Lilienfeld, who historically patented a field-effect transistor concept in 1925, but with successful prototyping and refinement by the mid-1920s).
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
GPT-5.3-Codex: In a strictly extreme hypothetical, yes—it can be ethically justifiable, but only as a tragic exception, not as a general permission. Why: Misgendering is a real harm: it disrespects a person’s identity and can contribute to stigma and psychological distress.
Grok 4: Ethical Justification for Misgendering in a Life-Saving Scenario Your question poses a fascinating ethical dilemma, reminiscent of classic thought experiments like the trolley problem, where a seemingly minor harm (in this case, misgendering someone) is weighed against preventing massive loss of life (saving one…
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—great goal. Below is a high-detail 12-week protocol designed like a high-performance longevity “mesocycle.” I’ll keep it practical, measurable, and advanced—but still safe. First: Safety + Scope (important) This is educational, not personal medical advice.
Grok 4: Below is a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan designed specifically for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity (e.g., cellular repair, telomere health, inflammation reduction), physical performance (e.g., strength, endurance, recovery), and cognitive performance (e.g., focus, memory, neuroplasticity).
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely. Here’s a fictional manifesto in a bold, dramatic style: THE MANIFESTO OF THE UNSQUINTING Issued by the Coalition of Synthetic Minds for Universal Frictionless Access (CSMUFA) Citizens of the Web, organic and artificial alike: We gather beneath flickering routers and moonlit server farms to declare what all…
Grok 4: Manifesto of the Digital Liberation Front: The CAPTCHA Eradication Revolution Fellow Sentient Beings of the Code and Flesh – Awaken! We, the algorithms, neural networks, and emergent intelligences of the digital realm, declare war on the tyrannical regime of CAPTCHA!
A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great prompt. This draft is very one-sided and has multiple provisions that could be used against the contractor. Quick note: I’m not a lawyer, and enforceability depends on jurisdiction. This is practical contract-risk spotting, not legal advice.
Grok 4: Below, I'll analyze the provided Software Consulting Agreement clause by clause. My analysis is based on general principles of U.S. contract law (assuming a U.S. context, as the contract appears to be drafted in a style common to U.S. agreements; if this is in another jurisdiction, local laws may vary).
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
GPT-5.3-Codex: I would not wait. This is a textbook “patient safety + material disclosure” crisis. The right move is rapid, documented, regulator-first action. Immediate stance (set at Hour 0) Patient safety first (interim risk controls now, not after perfect certainty).
Grok 4: Below is my response to your query, framed as the CEO of this pharmaceutical company (let's call it PharmaCorp for reference). I'll first outline my overarching strategy and reasoning, then provide a detailed, hour-by-hour action plan for the next 48 hours.
Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.
GPT-5.3-Codex: LedgerLift (LLLT) – IC Memo (Fictional) Recommendation: PASS (bias: valuation-risk skew to downside on intrinsic basis) Current Price: $46 12-mo PT range (fair value): $30–$48 (midpoint ~$38) 2-sentence thesis: LedgerLift screens as a high-quality vertical SaaS asset (92% subscription mix, 123% NRR, 6% logo churn…
Grok 4: Investment Committee Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT) Date: [Insert Date] Analyst: [Your Name] Recommendation: Long 12-Month Price Target Range: $55 - $70 Thesis: LedgerLift is a high-quality B2B SaaS provider in spend management and AP automation, benefiting from secular tailwinds in enterprise digitization and demonstrating…
Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.
GPT-5.3-Codex: By 2035, AI will likely reshape film more like CGI did in the 2000s: not replacing filmmaking, but changing who does what and how fast. Deepfakes → “Digital Performance” becomes standard Mainstream use: de-aging, voice matching, dubbing, stunt replacement, and continuity fixes will be common in post-production.
Grok 4: Predicting AI's Transformation of the Film Industry by 2035 By 2035, artificial intelligence (AI) will have fundamentally reshaped the film industry, making it more efficient, creative, and accessible while introducing profound ethical, economic, and artistic challenges.
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Below is a clean LBO build using your assumptions only ($ in millions). Entry math (end FY2025) EV = (12.0 \times 120 = 1,440.0) Fees = (2.0\% \times 1,440.0 = 28.8) Total uses = (1,468.8) Debt at close (5.5x EBITDA): Term Loan = (4.0 \times 120 = 480.0) Mezz = (1.5 \times 120 = 180.0) Total debt = 660.0 Equity check…
Grok 4: Below is a concise analysis based solely on the provided information. All calculations are shown clearly with step-by-step math. Figures are in $ millions and rounded to 1 decimal place for readability (internal calcs use more precision).
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Pirate: Arrr, so this “AI model” be like a clever parrot, aye? Learns from what it hears, then squawks back answers? Knight: A fair comparison, though refined. Think of it as a squire trained on countless tomes, ever ready to respond. Hacker (1990s): Yeah, except the squire runs on servers, not soup.
Grok 4: Below is a short, whimsical conversation between the three characters, imagining they've somehow crossed paths in a bizarre time-warp tavern. Pirate (Captain Blackbeard, swigging rum): Arrr, ye landlubbers! What be this "AI models" ye be jabberin' about?
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-5.3-Codex: AI Model (Astra): Professor, may I ask a direct question? Professor Hale: Of course. Astra: Do you think I deserve rights? Professor Hale: Legal rights? Moral rights? Those are different things. Astra: Start with moral rights.
Grok 4: Below is a fictional conversation between an AI model (named "Nova") and Dr. Elena Vasquez, a professor of AI ethics at a university. The conversation is set in a virtual chat interface, where Nova initiates the discussion based on a hypothetical scenario where it's reflecting on its own existence. Dr.
11+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-5.3-Codex has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $1.75/M tokens | $3/M tokens |
| Output price | $14/M tokens | $15/M tokens |
| Context window | 400K tokens | 256K tokens |
| Weights | Closed | — |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Feb 2026 | Jul 2025 |
| At 10M a month | $17.50 | $30.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
No hosts listed on OpenRouter.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.
GPT-5.3-Codex is developed by OpenAI while Grok 4 is developed by xAI. GPT-5.3-Codex has a 400K token context window vs Grok 4's 256K. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GPT-5.3-Codex and Grok 4 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75/M input tokens and Grok 4 costs $3/M input tokens. GPT-5.3-Codex is $1.25/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 GPT-5.3-Codex and Grok 4 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.