Grok-2 vs Gemini 1.5 Pro
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | Grok-2 | Gemini 1.5 Pro | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU (general capability) | 87.5% | 85.9% | +1.6% |
| Context window | 128K tokens | 2M tokens | — |
| Price (input / output per 1M) | $2 / $10 | $1.25 / $5 | — |
| Access | Proprietary API | Proprietary API | — |
- Grok-2 leads general capability (MMLU 87.5% vs 85.9%).
- Gemini 1.5 Pro offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Verdict: Grok-2 or Gemini 1.5 Pro?
Grok-2 advantages
- No decisive advantage on the tracked metrics.
Gemini 1.5 Pro advantages
- Context window (+94%)
- Input cost (+38%)
- Output cost (+50%)
Which should you choose?
- Choose the Gemini 1.5 Pro if you work with long documents or large codebases.
Value for money
Gemini 1.5 Pro offers more capability per dollar — a better value pick for high-volume use, delivering 1.88× the MMLU-per-cost of the alternative.
Grok-2 vs Gemini 1.5 Pro: which should you choose?
Grok-2 — xAI large language model (2024) with a 128K-token context window and an MMLU score of 87.5%.
Gemini 1.5 Pro — Google large language model (2024) with a 2M-token context window and an MMLU score of 85.9%.
Grok-2 vs Gemini 1.5 Pro: Grok-2 scores higher on the MMLU benchmark. Grok-2 leads general capability (MMLU 87.5% vs 85.9%). Gemini 1.5 Pro offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Capability and reasoning
On MMLU — a 57-subject benchmark of general knowledge and reasoning — the Grok-2 scores 87.5% versus 85.9%. MMLU is a useful proxy for raw knowledge but does not capture instruction-following, coding, tool use, latency or safety, so treat it as one signal among several.
Context window
The Gemini 1.5 Pro handles up to 2 million tokens per request, which sets how much documentation, transcript or code it can reason over at once — decisive for retrieval-augmented and long-document workflows.
Pricing and access
Grok-2 is proprietary api and Gemini 1.5 Pro is proprietary api. Proprietary models bill per token via API; open-weight models can be self-hosted, trading per-call cost for infrastructure you manage. For production, weigh throughput, rate limits and data-residency needs alongside headline price.
The verdict
Both are credible choices in the ai model comparison space; the specification table above lays out every metric so you can weigh the trade-offs that matter to you. Pick the one whose strengths line up with how you will actually use it.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Grok-2 better than the Gemini 1.5 Pro?
Gemini 1.5 Pro is the clearly stronger overall choice, winning most of the dimensions that matter. Grok-2 leads general capability (MMLU 87.5% vs 85.9%).
What is the main difference between the Grok-2 and the Gemini 1.5 Pro?
Grok-2 leads general capability (MMLU 87.5% vs 85.9%). Gemini 1.5 Pro offers the larger context window, useful for long documents and codebases.
Which is better value?
Gemini 1.5 Pro offers more capability per dollar — a better value pick for high-volume use, delivering 1.88× the MMLU-per-cost of the alternative.
Which should I choose?
Choose the Gemini 1.5 Pro if you work with long documents or large codebases.
Methodology
Large language models are compared on the MMLU benchmark (a widely-cited 57-subject test of general knowledge and reasoning, reported as a percentage), maximum context window, and published API pricing per million input and output tokens. Open-weight models can also be self-hosted. Benchmarks capture only part of real-world quality, which also depends on tool use, latency, safety and task fit.