ChatGPT vs Claude vs Gemini vs Grok

As of July 2026, there is no single best AI model for every job: the strongest AI chatbot depends on the task. Claude (flagship Claude Opus 4.8) leads agentic coding and factual reliability, ChatGPT (GPT-5.5) leads competition math and all-round polish, Gemini (3.1 Pro) leads science reasoning and multimodal breadth, and Grok (4.3) leads real-time data and API price. If you want one recommendation: choose Claude for coding and careful work, ChatGPT as the best general-purpose assistant, Gemini for multimodal and Google-ecosystem work, and Grok for live news and the cheapest tokens.

This page compares the four leading proprietary assistants from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and xAI across coding, math, computer use, reliability, real-time access, context, multimodal, and price. All figures were verified in July 2026; because model versions and scores change monthly, treat every number as a dated snapshot.

Quick verdict: which AI model is best in 2026?

• Best for coding and software agents: Claude Opus 4.8, at 88.6% on SWE-bench Verified. ^[4][11]
• Best all-round assistant and best at competition math: ChatGPT (GPT-5.5), which scores 100% on AIME 2025. ^[1][9]
• Best for science reasoning and multimodal: Gemini 3.1 Pro, at 94.3% on GPQA Diamond with native image and video. ^[5][10]
• Best for real-time data and cheapest API: Grok 4.3, at USD 1.25 / 5.00 per 1M input/output tokens with the X firehose. ^[7][8]

A version caveat matters for this comparison. The four assistants above are the generally available flagships in July 2026. Newer tiers exist but are not yet broadly available: OpenAI's GPT-5.6 Sol is in limited preview for roughly 20 organizations ^[3]; Google's Gemini 3.5 Pro slipped to a July 17 general-availability target and is still in preview ^[6]; xAI's Grok 4.5 is in private beta and Grok 5 is still training ^[7]. Anthropic also ships Claude Fable 5, its most capable model (about 95% SWE-bench Verified), as a premium tier above Opus 4.8. ^[11]

Capability-by-task matrix: which assistant wins each job?

Rows are common tasks; columns are the four assistants; the cell marks how each ranks. "Best" is the July 2026 leader on that axis.

Scroll sideways for more →

Last verified: July 2026. Rankings reflect published benchmarks plus product capability, not marketing claims.

Specifications and pricing at a glance

Scroll sideways for more →

Prices are USD per 1,000,000 tokens, standard tier, as of July 2026. ^{[1][4][5][7][8][14][15]} All four are closed, proprietary models. Grok 4.3 output pricing is 2.50 per 1M on some resellers and 5.00 on others; xAI cut Grok pricing about 40% at the 4.3 launch. ^[7][8][16]

Benchmark scorecard

Scroll sideways for more →

Last verified: July 2026. Sources: SWE-bench Verified and OSWorld ^{[4][9][10][11][12]}; GPQA Diamond and AIME 2025 ^[1][9][10]; hallucination rates ^[13]. AIME figures use each provider's AIME 2025 reporting and the LM Council OTIS Mock AIME aggregation; Gemini's exact AIME 2025 score and Grok 4.3's SWE-bench Verified and AIME 2025 scores were not cleanly published, so they are marked estimated or n/r rather than guessed. Grok's SWE-bench estimate follows reports that Grok 4.3 trails Claude Opus by roughly 14 points on SWE-bench. ^[7]

Which is best for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the coding leader, at 88.6% on SWE-bench Verified, ahead of GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro, which sit statistically tied near 80% (within margin of error). ^{[4][9][10][11]} Anthropic's premium Claude Fable 5 pushes this to roughly 95%. ^[11] Claude also leads on Terminal-Bench (74.6% for Opus 4.8) and SWE-Bench Pro (69.2%). ^[4] GPT-5.5 is close behind and is the strongest general coding copilot inside IDEs; Grok 4.3 trails on agentic coding, by about 14 points on SWE-bench per third-party reports. ^[7] For repository-scale refactors and autonomous coding agents, Claude is the default pick.

Which is best for math and reasoning?

For competition math, GPT-5.5 tops out at 100% on AIME 2025, matching the ceiling reached since GPT-5.2. ^[1][9] Claude Opus 4.8 follows at 98.3%. ^[9] For graduate science reasoning on GPQA Diamond, the four are tightly bunched: Gemini 3.1 Pro leads at 94.3% (the highest recorded at its launch), with Claude at 93.6% and GPT-5.5 at 93.5%, and Grok 4.3 at 90.1%. ^{[5][10][4][1][7]} Gemini also posts the strongest Humanity's Last Exam result of the group (about 46%) and 77.1% on ARC-AGI-2. ^[9][10] In short, GPT-5.5 wins pure math, Gemini edges hard science, and all four are excellent at everyday reasoning.

Which is best at computer use and agents?

On OSWorld, which tests whether a model can operate a real desktop autonomously, Claude Opus 4.8 leads the four at 83.4% (only Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 score higher, at 85%), with GPT-5.5 at 78.7%. ^[12] Google and xAI publish less on OSWorld for their current flagships, so Gemini and Grok are marked n/r here. Grok 4.3 is strong on tool-calling benchmarks such as τ-bench (97.7% on the τ²-bench variant), so it is capable for API-driven agents even though its desktop-automation numbers are unpublished. ^[7] For screen-based automation, Claude is the safest choice.

Which hallucinates least and is best calibrated?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the most factually reliable, with the highest knowledge-reliability (calibration) index among frontier models and a base hallucination rate near 4%. ^[13] GPT-5.5 is close, dropping to about 4.2% with extended thinking. ^[13] Gemini 3.1 Pro runs near 9% unaided but falls to roughly 3-4% when grounded with Google Search. ^[13] Grok 4.3 has the highest hallucination rate of the group, near 12%, though its live grounding helps with recency. ^[13] One caveat applies to all four: the highest-reasoning modes can hallucinate more on simple factual recall, so calibration, not raw intelligence, is what to watch. ^[13]

Which has the best real-time data access?

Grok wins real-time by design: it draws on the live X (Twitter) firehose plus web search, making it the strongest choice for breaking news and social sentiment. ^[7] Gemini is a strong second through native Google Search grounding, which also cuts its hallucination rate. ^[13] ChatGPT and Claude both offer web browsing and web search but are not wired to a live social feed, so they lag for up-to-the-minute events.

Which has the biggest context window?

All four generally available flagships offer a 1M-token context window, so for most long-document work they are equivalent. ^[1][4][5][7] Gemini pulls ahead on the horizon: the in-preview Gemini 3.5 Pro doubles this to a 2M-token window. ^[6] Maximum output is 128K tokens on GPT-5.5 and Claude Opus 4.8, and 64K on Gemini 3.1 Pro and Grok 4.3. ^[1][4][5][8]

Which is best for multimodal (image, voice, video)?

Gemini is the multimodal leader, with native image generation, the strongest native video understanding, Veo video generation, and Gemini Live voice. ^[5] ChatGPT is strong: image input and generation, Advanced Voice, and Sora for video (a separate product). ^[1] Grok is also broadly multimodal, with Grok Imagine image and video generation and voice. ^[7] Claude is the narrowest here: it handles image and document input and mobile voice but does not natively generate images or video, prioritizing text and code instead. ^[4]

How much does each cost?

On the API, Grok 4.3 is cheapest at USD 1.25 per 1M input tokens and 2.50 to 5.00 output, followed by Gemini 3.1 Pro at 2.00 / 12.00. ^{[5][7][8][16]} Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 are the premium options at 5.00 / 25.00 and 5.00 / 30.00 respectively. ^[4][15] For consumers, the standard tier has converged near USD 20 per month: ChatGPT Plus at 20, Claude Pro at 20, and Google AI Pro at 19.99, while SuperGrok is 30. ^[14] Power-user tiers run higher: ChatGPT Pro and Claude Max at 200, Google AI Ultra from about 100 to 249, and SuperGrok Heavy at 300. ^[14] See Artificial Analysis for live cost-per-intelligence tracking.

Which should you choose?

• You write or ship code: Claude Opus 4.8. It leads SWE-bench Verified, Terminal-Bench, and OSWorld, and is the strongest autonomous coding agent. ^[4][11][12]
• You want the best single all-round assistant: ChatGPT (GPT-5.5). Top competition-math scores, excellent writing and reasoning, the broadest tool and plugin ecosystem, and low hallucination. ^[1][9][13]
• You need multimodal, long context, or you live in Google Workspace: Gemini 3.1 Pro. Best image and video handling, best GPQA Diamond, cheapest premium-tier API of the majors, and a 2M window arriving with 3.5 Pro. ^[5][6][10]
• You need live information, edgy answers, or the lowest token cost: Grok 4.3. Real-time X and web access and the cheapest API, at the cost of higher hallucination and weaker agentic coding. ^[7][13]
• You value factual accuracy above all: Claude Opus 4.8, the best-calibrated frontier model, or GPT-5.5 grounded, or Gemini with Search grounding. ^[13]

For most users, the honest answer to "which AI is best" is to keep two subscriptions: one of ChatGPT or Claude for reasoning and coding, plus Gemini or Grok for multimodal or real-time needs. On a single pick, ChatGPT remains the safest all-rounder and Claude the safest for technical work, as of July 2026.

References

1. OpenAI, "Introducing GPT-5.5," openai.com. https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-5/ ↩
2. TechCrunch, "OpenAI releases GPT-5.5 Instant, a new default model for ChatGPT," 2026-05-05. https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/05/openai-releases-gpt-5-5-instant-a-new-default-model-for-chatgpt/
3. VentureBeat, "OpenAI unveils GPT-5.6 Sol, Terra and Luna models, but only accessible to limited preview partners for now." https://venturebeat.com/technology/openai-unveils-gpt-5-6-sol-terra-and-luna-models-but-only-accessible-to-limited-preview-partners-for-now-per-us-gov ↩
4. LLM-Stats, "Claude Opus 4.8 Release, Benchmarks and More" (Anthropic model card figures). https://llm-stats.com/blog/research/claude-opus-4-8-launch ↩
5. Google DeepMind, "Gemini 3.1 Pro" model page. https://deepmind.google/models/gemini/pro/ ↩
6. BigGo Finance, "Google Delays Gemini 3.5 Pro Launch to July 17 for Full Architectural Rebuild." https://finance.biggo.com/news/6f0c6bb2-795f-4c57-9d09-6db691d7638a ↩
7. Artificial Analysis, "xAI launches Grok 4.3 with improved agentic performance and lower pricing." https://artificialanalysis.ai/articles/xai-launches-grok-4-3-with-improved-agentic-performance-and-lower-pricing ↩
8. Artificial Analysis, "Grok 4.3 (high): Intelligence, Performance & Price Analysis." https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/grok-4-3 ↩
9. LM Council, "AI Model Benchmarks Jul 2026: Compare GPT-5.5, Claude Opus, Gemini 3, Grok 4." https://lmcouncil.ai/benchmarks ↩
10. Digital Applied, "Google Gemini 3.1 Pro: Benchmarks, Pricing & Guide." https://www.digitalapplied.com/blog/google-gemini-3-1-pro-benchmarks-pricing-guide ↩
11. Morph, "Claude Benchmarks (2026): every model, score, API ID, and price." https://www.morphllm.com/claude-benchmarks ↩
12. BenchLM, "OSWorld-Verified Benchmark 2026: LLM scores." https://benchlm.ai/benchmarks/osWorldVerified ↩
13. Digital Applied, "AI Hallucination Rate Benchmarks 2026: 5-Model Study." https://www.digitalapplied.com/blog/ai-model-hallucination-rate-benchmarks-2026-study ↩
14. Sentisight, "2026 AI Subscription Prices: Gemini vs ChatGPT vs Claude vs Grok." https://www.sentisight.ai/ai-price-comparison-gemini-chatgpt-claude-grok/ ↩
15. AI Pricing Guru, "GPT-5.6 Pricing (July 2026): Sol, Terra, Luna, and GPT-5.5 per-token rates." https://www.aipricing.guru/openai-pricing/ ↩
16. Requesty, "xAI Grok 4.3 API Pricing & Cost: Context Window & Benchmarks." https://www.requesty.ai/models/xai/grok-4.3 ↩