upvote

points

by zug_zug1 days ago |
comments
upvoteby sejje1 days ago|
next
[-]
If you haven't used it, how do you know if it's winning?

I think it's winning on UI for normies (grok bot) and they made some claims about being pareto SOTA (lowest cost per task completed) a while back with 4.6.

I find it to be a perfectly capable model for implementation (there are many in this class--deepseek flash, spark1.3, luna, etc). I find the usage to be very generous w/ supergrok. I find the model to be just fine for 90% of what I want to do, but I use a smarter model to plan complicated things.

reply
upvoteby zug_zug20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> If you haven't used it, how do you know if it's winning?

I'm judging on benchmarks, and whether anybody or any company I know has ever suggested using it (not yet).

reply
upvoteby sejje19 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Okay, but it's winning on (some) benchmarks, so maybe you're not judging by them after all.

I don't personally make my judgements based on how many other people mention a thing, but if that gets your code written, by all means.

reply
upvoteby swalsh1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
After the cursor aquisition it's become a quite capable coding model. If you take cost into account, it's close to the top. OpenAI is maybe still #1, but I'd put Grok at #2 (again, including cost as a factor).
reply
upvoteby grim_io1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
It's probably the most aligned (to a single person) model out there!
reply
upvoteby puszczyk1 days ago|
prev|
[-]
For me it works well for agentic coding tasks and terminal/unix/bash (in cursor and grok build); it's also token efficient and cheaper than gpt 5.6. It's def not as good as Fable for me (I haven't used Astra much, can't comment). So it's not the cheapest, not the most capable, but it has a good mix of it for my backend, go, infra work.

The voice is the same AI slop as the others imho.

(This is about Grok 4.6, I didn't test 4.7 yet).

edit: clarified I mean agentic coding tasks

reply
upvoteby svachalek1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The voice is the weird part. The early Grok 4 models had a very distinct presentation unlike anything else out there. Then suddenly it made a big jump in coding ability and started sounding just like every other model.
reply
upvoteby puszczyk1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
[dead]
reply
upvoteby Shekelphile23 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
> it's also token efficient and cheaper than gpt 5.6.

Deepswe results show that grok 4.6 is more expensive per-task and consistently scores worse than: luna xhigh, glm 5.3, astra low, sol high/xhigh, opus 5 medium.

Grok also used almost 3x as many tokens/turns to complete tasks than all of those models (besides luna), so it takes way more time to complete a task.

There isn't much reason to use Grok at all, it's gotten better but it's still worse than every other player in the field, which shouldn't be a surprise considering until about a year ago they were just buying tokens from other providers and pretending it was their own model.

With gpt-6 luna and sol coming tomorrow it's going to look even worse too, especially if new luna retains the same dirt cheap pricing that 5.6 luna has.

reply