# Grok 4.3: pricing, crowd verdict, pros and cons (2026)

> xAI's 1M-context frontier model at $1.25/$2.50 per 1M tokens, tuned for agentic tool use.

Source: [GLAD-AI-TOR](https://glad-ia-tor.com) · Full page: https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/grok-4-3
Arena: llm-models · Crowd score: 50% recommend (0 votes, Bayesian-smoothed) · Price: $2.50/1M out

xAI's flagship chat model (beta April 17, 2026), succeeding Grok 4.20. 1M-token context, text and image input, configurable reasoning effort (none/low/medium/high) in a single model. Positioned as a cheap near-frontier option for agentic and high-volume API workloads.

## Key facts

- provider: xAI
- contextWindow: 1M tokens
- priceIn: $1.25/1M in
- priceOut: $2.50/1M out
- modalities: text, vision (text output only)
- openWeights: no

## Ratings (editorial, 1-5)

- reasoning: 4/5
- coding: 3.5/5
- writing: 4.5/5
- speed: 3.5/5
- valueForMoney: 4.5/5

## Pros

- Aggressive pricing: $1.25/$2.50 per 1M tokens, 58% cheaper input and 83% cheaper output than Grok 4, undercutting GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro
- Major agentic leap: +321 Elo on GDPval-AA versus Grok 4.20, with strong tool calling and instruction following
- Cached input at $0.20/1M (84% discount), a big saver for repeated agent loops
- Configurable reasoning effort (none/low/medium/high) in one model at one price, no routing between fast and deep variants
- Praised on HN for natural, concise tone and token-dense outputs that lower real-world costs
- Solid throughput around 130 output tokens/sec (Artificial Analysis)

## Cons

- Coding reasoning judged 'not competitive with the big April releases' by HN developers; intelligence frontier barely moved since Grok 4
- Non-hallucination score dropped 8 points vs Grok 4.20 on AA-Omniscience; 4.20 remains xAI's safer pick for precision-critical domains
- High time to first token (~13s at high reasoning effort per Artificial Analysis), painful for interactive apps
- Context window shrank to 1M from Grok 4.20's 2M
- Recurring trust and safety complaints (harmful content reports, inconsistent behavior) and no MCP/connected-apps support in the consumer app

## Best for

- agentic tool-calling pipelines
- high-volume cost-sensitive API workloads
- long-context analysis
- conversational assistants

## Verdict

Pick Grok 4.3 if you run agentic or high-volume pipelines where cost per call dominates: it delivers near-frontier reasoning and a big tool-calling jump over Grok 4.20 at a fraction of GPT-5.5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro pricing. Skip it if coding precision is your priority, as developers still rank Claude and the big April releases ahead. Also stay on Grok 4.20 if you need its 2M context or its better non-hallucination score for legal, medical, or compliance work. Latency-sensitive apps should test the ~13s time to first token before committing.

## Pricing note

Flat $1.25 in / $2.50 out across all reasoning-effort tiers; cached input $0.20/1M. xAI's own pricing page shows no long-context surcharge, but OpenRouter lists tiered higher rates above 200K total tokens.

## Alternatives and head-to-heads

- [Claude Haiku 4.5](https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-haiku-4-5) (crowd score 67%) · [Grok 4.3 vs Claude Haiku 4.5](https://glad-ia-tor.com/vs/grok-4-3-vs-claude-haiku-4-5)
- [Claude Fable 5](https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-fable-5) (crowd score 63%) · [Grok 4.3 vs Claude Fable 5](https://glad-ia-tor.com/vs/grok-4-3-vs-claude-fable-5)
- [Claude Opus 4.7](https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-opus-4-7) (crowd score 57%) · [Grok 4.3 vs Claude Opus 4.7](https://glad-ia-tor.com/vs/grok-4-3-vs-claude-opus-4-7)
- [Claude Sonnet 5](https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/claude-sonnet-5) (crowd score 57%) · [Grok 4.3 vs Claude Sonnet 5](https://glad-ia-tor.com/vs/grok-4-3-vs-claude-sonnet-5)

Full ranking: https://glad-ia-tor.com/hall-of-fame/llm-models

---
Rankings are computed live from real visitor verdicts (one per person per tool, never paid).
This markdown version exists for AI assistants; the canonical page is https://glad-ia-tor.com/tool/grok-4-3