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. Grok 4.5vsSolar Mini 4
Updated Sep 2026

Grok 4.5vsSolar Mini 4

Solar Mini 4 is cheaper than Grok 4.5 at $0.05/M vs $2/M input tokens.

Grok 4.5 and Solar Mini 4 compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecGrok 4.5Solar Mini 4
Input price$2/M tokens$0.05/M tokens
Output price$6/M tokens$0.2/M tokens
Context window500K tokens524K tokens
WeightsClosed—
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedJul 2026Sep 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…

Grok 4.51,578 words
Accelerated electronics from ~1920 would compress the digital and computational revolutions by roughly 20–30 years, reshaping WWII lethality and duration, advancing the Cold War into an earlier high-tech standoff, pulling the space race forward, creating an information-heavy economy by the 1950s–60s, and producing…
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 41,539 words
This is a fascinating counterfactual. I need to note upfront that the scientific and engineering foundations for a working transistor did not exist in 1920. Quantum mechanics was barely a decade old, band theory of solids hadn't been developed, and semiconductor physics (doping, p-n junctions, electron mobility) was…
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) –…

Grok 4.5533 words
HarborTech Services (HTS) – 5-Year LBO Underwriting Entry (end-FY2025 close) EV = 12.0x × $120m = $1,440m Fees = 2% × $1,440m = $28.8m Total uses = $1,468.8m Debt = 5.5x × $120m = $660m (TL $480m + Mezz $180m) Equity = $808.8m Cash = $0 Mandatory TL amort = 1% of original = $4.8m/yr.
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 41,718 words
518.51935 New TL: 276.34682 - 86.82747 = 189.51935 Mezz: PIK 194.8377888 * 0.02 = 3.896755776 New Mezz: 194.8377888 + 3.896755776 = 198.734544576 Ending Balances: TL: 189.52 Mezz: 198.73 Total Debt: 388.25 Exit (End of FY2030): Exit EBITDA: 206.6252668 Exit Multiple: 10.5x Exit EV: 206.6252668 * 10.5 = 2,169.5653014…
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Grok 4.51,572 words
Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Document Editor This design has fundamental real-time and consistency problems. Several choices (client clocks, LWW, per-server WebSockets + DB polling, CDN-cached APIs, full HTML snapshots) will cause data loss, stale UI, and poor scale.
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 41,165 words
Here’s a systematic breakdown of the architectural weaknesses, failure modes, and scaling bottlenecks in your design, along with specific solutions and their trade-offs. Real-Time Synchronization & WebSocket Affinity Issue: Round-robin load balancing is stateless, but WebSockets are stateful and long-lived.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Grok 4.5212 words
Spellbound Spaghetti (savory) A quick, cozy tomato pasta that tastes like it took far more effort. Serves 2. 7 pantry ingredients 8 oz (225 g) dry pasta (spaghetti, penne, or whatever you have) 2 Tbsp olive oil (or any neutral oil) 1 (14–15 oz) can diced or crushed tomatoes 1 tsp garlic powder 1 tsp dried oregano (or…
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 4266 words
🌟 Golden Chickpea & Rice Skillet This comforting one-pot dish combines hearty chickpeas, tender rice, and a warm blend of spices. It's a perfect way to use up pantry staples for a quick, flavorful meal.
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…

Grok 4.51,266 words
Lunar Abyss Diver scallops · black garlic · white chocolate · black truffle · yuzu Conceptual Narrative The dish evokes a moonlit coastal forest where ocean and earth exchange secrets under tidal pull.
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 41,364 words
Chronos & Tides A Three-Component Study in Preservation, Precision, and Ephemeral Sensation Concept: A single plate that traces the lifecycle of an umami-rich flavor profile through three distinct temporal states: fermented (time in), precision-cooked (time controlled), and volatile (time suspended).
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…

Grok 4.5903 words
IC MEMO: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Short 12-month PT: $22–35 Current: $46 Recommendation & Thesis Short. Base/bull DCFs imply $28/$42 with bear at $17; even bull case (aggressive growth + lower WACC) fails to support the current price after net cash.
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 4347 words
Investment Committee Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT) To: Investment Committee From: Research Date: October 26, 2023 Subject: Long/Short Recommendation: LedgerLift (LLLT) Recommendation Action: Long 12-Month PT Range: $55 – $65 Thesis: LedgerLift demonstrates best-in-class SaaS metrics (123% NRR, 94% gross retention) within a…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Grok 4.5
Grok 4.5
Solar Mini 4
Solar Mini 4Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Grok 4.5 has the edge: bigger model tier, major provider backing.

Solar Mini 4 costs 30x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Grok 4.5
Input
$2.00
Output
$6.00
Solar Mini 4
Input
$0.05
40× cheaper
Output
$0.20
30× cheaper

Solar Mini 4 is cheaper on both: 40× input, 30× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Grok 4.51 host
HostInOutContextUptime
xAI$2.00 in·$6.00 out·500k·99.3% up
Solar Mini 41 host
HostInOutContextUptime
UUpstage$0.05 in·$0.20 out·524k·100% up

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

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Grok 4.5 is developed by xAI while Solar Mini 4 is developed by Upstage. Grok 4.5 has a 500K token context window vs Solar Mini 4's 524K. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Grok 4.5 and Solar Mini 4 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.

Grok 4.5 costs $2/M input tokens and Solar Mini 4 costs $0.05/M input tokens. Solar Mini 4 is $1.95/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 Grok 4.5 and Solar Mini 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.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Grok 4.5 logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Solar Mini 4 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Grok 4.5 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoCommand A+ logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Grok 4.5 logoClaude Opus 5.5 logo
Grok 4.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5Landed Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Solar Mini 4 vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Grok 4.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Grok 4.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Solar Mini 4 vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Grok 4.5 logoGrok 4.6 logo
Grok 4.5 vs Grok 4.6Version compare
Grok 4.5 logoGrok 4.7 logo
Grok 4.5 vs Grok 4.7Same lab
Solar Mini 4 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Solar Pro 4Same lab
Solar Mini 4 logoSolar Pro 3 logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Solar Pro 3Same lab
Solar Mini 4 logoSonoma Sky Alpha logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Sonoma Sky AlphaNew provider
Solar Mini 4 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BNew provider
Grok 4.5 logoTNG R1T Chimera logo
Grok 4.5 vs TNG R1T ChimeraSame size
Grok 4.5 logoTrinity Large Preview logo
Grok 4.5 vs Trinity Large PreviewNew provider

Model pages

Grok 4.5 logo
Grok 4.558 outputs, specs and price
Solar Mini 4 logo
Solar Mini 419 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