Claude Opus vs Grok
Both are pitched at agentic coding. Opus 5 has the deeper track record and twice the context; Grok 4.6 is cheaper below 200K tokens and offers four reasoning-effort levels instead of three. Grok's catch is the long-context toll: cross 200K and the rate doubles for every token in the request, including the ones below the line.
| Claude Opus | Grok | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Current release | Opus 5 | 4.6 |
| Tier | Frontier | Frontier |
| Context | 1M | 500K |
| Cost | Premium | Moderate |
| Modalities | text, vision | text, vision |
| Open weights | No | No |
Cost is a tier, not a quote — providers change prices often. Check Anthropic and xAI before you commit. Last updated 2026-08-14.
Which one to pick
Claude OpusAnthropic · Opus 5
Agentic coding and multi-step engineering work — near the ceiling, at half the price
Reach for it when- Long sessions that will exceed 200K tokens — no pricing cliff
- Work where the coding track record matters more than the price
GrokxAI · 4.6
Agentic coding with tool use, especially inside xAI's own tooling
Reach for it when- Short-context agentic tasks where the lower rate compounds
- You want an xhigh reasoning setting for occasional hard problems
Related comparisons
- Claude Opus vs GPT-5.6 SolThe headline matchup, and closer than either vendor's marketing suggests.
- Claude Opus vs Gemini ProTwo different bets.
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GrokSol is the safer default and scores higher overall; Grok 4.6 matches it on some agentic work at a fraction of the short-context price.
- Gemini Pro vs GrokSimilar price band, different shapes.
- Claude Fable vs Claude OpusThe within-Claude question.
- Claude Opus vs Claude SonnetThe one most Claude users get wrong by defaulting up.