Fronset Benchmark

Grok 4.5 (archived)

Provider
xAI
Model name
grok-4.5
Last benchmarked
Qualified on
37 / 52 tasks (at the 90% bar)
Best value on
0 tasks

Good enough on 37/52 tasks at the 90% bar. Best value on 0 tasks. Best fit for: Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions, Long-form Content Generation, Relevance, Classification & Matching, Social & Promotional Content, Content Summarization & Synthesis, Topic Organization & Clustering.

Cost vs quality across all tasks, as of 5 September 2026

0%25%50%75%100%678910Quality score (6–10)Cost-efficiency vs best value (1.0 = best value)Community Content Promotion Generation — quality 8.40, 15.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionNewsletter Copy Generation — quality 9.24, 22.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBatch Text Translation — quality 8.74, 17.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Cluster Labeling — quality 8.61, 9.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Sequence Optimization — quality 8.94, 18.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Region Identification — quality 8.27, 2.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVoice Profile Generation — quality 9.22, 14.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Analysis — quality 8.70, 5.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Section Assignment — quality 7.95, 23.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublication Title Package Generation — quality 8.65, 12.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReport Outline Generation — quality 9.52, 12.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSocial Post Portfolio Selection — quality 8.37, 95.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent Set Relevance Scoring — quality 6.85, 7.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Content Summarization — quality 8.43, 24.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionShort Post Batch Relevance Scoring — quality 7.29, 32.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSubject Configuration Generation — quality 8.67, 13.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Output Extraction — quality 9.33, 35.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Query Validation — quality 8.10, 23.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPersona Policy Eligibility Check — quality 8.72, 45.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionShort Promotional Teaser Generation — quality 8.02, 55.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReport Executive Summary Generation — quality 8.34, 3.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionMulti Perspective Decision Synthesis — quality 8.61, 12.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionGenerated Content Relevance Scoring — quality 8.88, 19.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Query Generation — quality 7.64, 24.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionLanguage Identification — quality 9.89, 64.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCatalyst And Scenario Analysis — quality 8.54, 2.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReference Preserving Analytical Writing — quality 8.69, 31.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Section Analysis — quality 9.06, 16.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublic Response Generation — quality 7.81, 12.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublication Section Taxonomy Generation — quality 9.41, this model IS the best-value good-enough option★Engagement Opportunity Triage — quality 8.73, 44.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Community Selection — quality 7.81, 98.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Campaign Generation — quality 8.13, 11.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Taxonomy Matching — quality 8.40, 10.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfile Pool Matching — quality 8.59, 25.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Message Generation — quality 8.30, 22.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent To Image Prompt Generation — quality 8.54, 14.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough option

within ~1.3× of the best-value model · 1.3–2× · >2× · ★ this model is the best-value pick on that task. Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the 90% bar are plotted.

Per-task breakdown, as of 5 September 2026

TaskCategoryQuality (% of best)ConfidenceOverpay
Publication Section Taxonomy Generation ★ bestLong-form Content Generation100%RANKEDbest value
Catalyst And Scenario AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions97%RANKED2.2x
Research Region IdentificationStructured Data & Fact Extraction94%RANKED2.8x
Report Executive Summary GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis96%RANKED3.1x
Profiled Document AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions100%RANKED5.3x
Content Set Relevance ScoringRelevance, Classification & Matching95%MEDIUM7x
Topic Cluster LabelingTopic Organization & Clustering97%HIGH9.7x
Topic Taxonomy MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching100%RANKED11x
Promotional Campaign GenerationSocial & Promotional Content91%RANKED11x
Public Response GenerationSocial & Promotional Content92%HIGH12x
Report Outline GenerationLong-form Content Generation99%RANKED12x
Multi Perspective Decision SynthesisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions97%RANKED13x
Publication Title Package GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis94%RANKED13x
Subject Configuration GenerationFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions98%RANKED14x
Content To Image Prompt GenerationInfrastructure & Utility95%RANKED14x
Voice Profile GenerationLong-form Content Generation94%RANKED15x
Community Content Promotion GenerationSocial & Promotional Content97%RANKED16x
Profiled Document Section AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions99%RANKED17x
Batch Text TranslationInfrastructure & Utility93%RANKED18x
Topic Sequence OptimizationTopic Organization & Clustering100%RANKED18x
Generated Content Relevance ScoringRelevance, Classification & Matching97%HIGH19x
Newsletter Copy GenerationLong-form Content Generation99%RANKED22x
Promotional Message GenerationSocial & Promotional Content95%HIGH23x
Topic Section AssignmentTopic Organization & Clustering91%MEDIUM24x
Research Query ValidationInfrastructure & Utility93%HIGH24x
Research Query GenerationInfrastructure & Utility94%HIGH24x
Structured Content SummarizationContent Summarization & Synthesis91%RANKED25x
Profile Pool MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching97%MEDIUM25x
Reference Preserving Analytical WritingLong-form Content Generation95%HIGH31x
Short Post Batch Relevance ScoringRelevance, Classification & Matching96%HIGH33x
Structured Output ExtractionStructured Data & Fact Extraction95%RANKED35x
Engagement Opportunity TriageRelevance, Classification & Matching98%RANKED44x
Persona Policy Eligibility CheckRelevance, Classification & Matching95%RANKED46x
Short Promotional Teaser GenerationSocial & Promotional Content91%RANKED56x
Language IdentificationRelevance, Classification & Matching98%RANKED65x
Social Post Portfolio SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching95%RANKED96x
Research Community SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching97%RANKED99x

Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that clears the quality bar on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option; ★ means this model is that option (no overpayment). Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence): RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) — HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) — MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt). LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site. See the methodology for the exact thresholds.