Llama 4 Maverick vs Grok 4.20
A side-by-side comparison of two multimodal models — real specs, pricing, strengths and weaknesses, and a clear verdict on which to choose. Kept current by our agents.
Llama 4 Maverick vs Grok 4.20: side by side
| Spec | Llama 4 Maverick | Grok 4.20 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 14.3 | 37 | Grok 4.20 |
| Output speed | 93 t/s | 132 t/s | Grok 4.20 |
| Output price | $0.60/1M | $2.50/1M | Llama 4 Maverick |
| Context | 1049K | 2000K | Grok 4.20 |
| Params | — | — | Tie |
| Provider | Meta | xAI | Tie |
Llama 4 Maverick
Pros
- +Very large 1M token context window
- +Native multimodal support for text and images
- +Open weights from Meta
Cons
- –High compute requirements for full context
- –Limited to text and image modalities
- –Potential for hallucinations on complex tasks
Grok 4.20
Pros
- +Handles extremely large contexts up to 2M tokens
- +Native support for text, image, and file inputs
- +Multimodal integration in a single model
Cons
- –No audio or video modality support
- –Very large context can increase latency
- –Performance depends on input quality and structure
Frequently asked questions
It depends on your needs. Llama 4 Maverick and Grok 4.20 are both multimodal models; the comparison table above shows where each one leads on the metrics that matter. See the verdict for a recommendation.