{"id":5120,"date":"2026-05-07T18:21:50","date_gmt":"2026-05-07T18:21:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/"},"modified":"2026-10-06T17:47:04","modified_gmt":"2026-10-06T17:47:04","slug":"grok-comparison","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/","title":{"rendered":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity 2026"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"padding-top: 40px;\">\n<section class=\"hero\">\n<div class=\"hero-content\">\n<div class=\"hero-label\">Grok vs Other AI Models<\/div>\n<h1>Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, <br \/>Gemini and Perplexity: <br \/>A 2026 Honest Comparison<\/h1>\n<p class=\"hero-subtitle\" style=\"padding-top: 30px;\">\n                Comparison content for AI models is a swamp. Vendor pages cherry-pick benchmarks. Aggregators copy each other. Headline numbers cite Heavy multi-agent configurations against single-agent rivals.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-top: 24px; font-size: 19px; color: #9ca3af; max-width: 800px;\">\n                This page does the work in the open. Every claim cites the benchmark that produced it. Where benchmarks measure different things, we say so. Where Grok wins, we show the win. Where Grok loses, we show the loss.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-top: 24px; font-size: 18px; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85); max-width: 800px;\">\n                Two findings frame everything below. First, in the <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#corrected-least\" style=\"color: #fff; text-decoration: underline;\">Suprmind Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), Grok answers were judged corrected by another model on 7.4% of answers, against 3 to 4% for GPT, Perplexity and Claude, when at least two of three AI judges had to agree. Second, Grok-3 fabricated citations 94% of the time on the Columbia Journalism Review test, the worst score of any model tested.\n            <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<p>    <!-- suprmind-demo-injection --><\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align:center; max-width:800px; margin:0 auto 24px;\">See how Grok Works With other Four Frontier AI Models in Multi-AI Orchestrated Business Discussion<\/h2>\n<p>    <style>@media (max-width: 768px){#suprmind-demo{margin-left:calc(-1 * var(--suprmind-demo-mobile-bleed, 8px))!important;margin-right:calc(-1 * var(--suprmind-demo-mobile-bleed, 8px))!important;width:calc(100% + var(--suprmind-demo-mobile-bleed, 8px) * 2)!important;}}<\/style><div id=\"suprmind-demo\" style=\"width:100%; overflow:hidden;\"><\/div><br \/>\n    <!-- \/suprmind-demo-injection --><\/p>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Methodology<\/div>\n<h2>Why comparing AI models <br \/>is harder than it looks.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 19px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 40px 0 40px 0;\">\n                Three forces distort AI comparison content.\n            <\/p>\n<div style=\"overflow: hidden; margin-bottom: 40px;\">\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 32%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Different benchmarks measure different things<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n                        AA-Omniscience asks whether a model admits ignorance or fabricates. FACTS measures multi-dimensional factuality on grounded prompts. Vectara measures hallucination during summarization. CJR measures citation attribution. A model can win one and lose the next without contradiction. Grok 4 leads Health and Science on AA-Omniscience while scoring 94% citation hallucination on CJR.\n                    <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 32%; margin-left: 2%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Configuration matters more than version names<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n                        Grok 4 Heavy uses 16 parallel agents and tool access. GPT-5 in standard chat uses one agent. Comparing Heavy benchmark scores to single-agent Claude or Gemini outputs inflates Grok&#8217;s apparent lead. Where this happens below, we mark it.\n                    <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 32%; margin-left: 2%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Production behavior diverges from benchmarks<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n                        Benchmarks measure constrained tasks. The Suprmind <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#methods\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> measures what models do on real questions. Its Q3 2026 Edition re-checked 17,885 real questions answered by several AI models between July 30 and September 10, 2026, with model names hidden and answers in random order. The production view is the more useful one for orchestration decisions.\n                    <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"clear: both;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-left: 2px solid #8b5cf6; border-radius: 12px;\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.95);\">\n                    Per the <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#methods\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), real agreement is rare: in 32 of the 13,563 questions our production judge read (0.2%), no model added, corrected or contradicted anything. The question is rarely which model is right. The question is which combination surfaces what each model alone would miss.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1100px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Grok vs ChatGPT<\/div>\n<h2>The polished generalist <br \/>vs. the contrarian with X access.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 19px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 40px auto 40px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                ChatGPT is the polished generalist. Grok is the contrarian with X access. Both have similar AA-Omniscience hallucination profiles. Their distinguishing differences sit elsewhere.\n            <\/p>\n<div style=\"overflow: hidden; margin-bottom: 40px;\">\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where Grok leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Response speed (documented fastest of frontier models per Spliiit, April 2026)<\/li>\n<li>Real-time X\/Twitter social data via native integration<\/li>\n<li>Context window: 2M tokens vs ChatGPT&#8217;s 1.05M (GPT-5.4)<\/li>\n<li>AA-Omniscience hallucination: Grok 4 at 64% vs GPT-5.2 at ~78%<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: right; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where ChatGPT leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>FACTS factuality overall: GPT-5 at 61.8 vs <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/pricing\/\" title=\"Grok Pricing 2026\"  data-wpil-monitor-id=\"2667\">Grok<\/a> 4 at 53.6<\/li>\n<li>Enterprise API maturity, governance, audit logs<\/li>\n<li>Content safety predictability (fewer documented incidents)<\/li>\n<li>HLE solo-with-tools: GPT-5 ~41% vs Grok 4 at 38.6%<\/li>\n<li>Professional UX polish and platform breadth<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"clear: both;\"><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 0 auto; max-width: 900px;\">\n                <strong>The honest framing:<\/strong> the two models are closer in raw capability than headline benchmark scores imply when comparing solo (non-Heavy, non-multi-agent) configurations. Grok&#8217;s lead on AA-Omni hallucination rate is real but both models trail Claude. ChatGPT&#8217;s enterprise lead is structural, not benchmark-driven.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 24px auto 24px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                In the <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#corrected-least\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), the two land in different groups. When at least two of three AI judges, from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google, had to agree, GPT answers were judged corrected by another model on 3.4% of answers and Grok answers on 7.4%. No GPT model was the most corrected in any of our line-ups.\n            <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1100px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Grok vs Claude<\/div>\n<h2>The headline is calibration. <br \/>Grok confidently produces wrong answers. <br \/>Claude declines.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-left: 2px solid #8b5cf6; border-radius: 12px; margin: 40px auto; max-width: 900px;\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.95);\">\n                    Per <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/ai-hallucination-rates-and-benchmarks\/\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind&#8217;s AI Hallucination Rates and Benchmarks reference<\/a> (May 2026 update), Claude 4.1 Opus scores 0% AA-Omniscience hallucination because it refuses uncertain questions rather than guessing. Grok 4 attempts an answer at 64% hallucination-when-wrong. This is not a small architectural difference. It is two different philosophies of what an AI should do when it does not know.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"overflow: hidden; margin-bottom: 40px;\">\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where Grok leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Speed (fastest of frontier models)<\/li>\n<li>Real-time X data integration<\/li>\n<li>Context window: 2M tokens vs Claude&#8217;s 200K<\/li>\n<li>Domain leads on AA-Omniscience: Health, Science<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: right; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where Claude leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>AA-Omniscience hallucination: 0% vs Grok 4&#8217;s 64%<\/li>\n<li>HalluHard (Opus 4.5 + web search): 30% (best tested)<\/li>\n<li>Judged corrected by another model less often: 4.3% of answers vs Grok&#8217;s 7.4% (Divergence Index, Q3 2026)<\/li>\n<li>Domain leads: Law, Software Engineering, Humanities<\/li>\n<li>Long-document fidelity, citation accuracy<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"clear: both;\"><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 0 auto 24px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                <strong>The correction gap backs this up.<\/strong> The <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#model-by-model\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition) compares them directly. In our mid-tier line-up, Grok 4.3 was judged corrected on 14.8% of its answers. Claude Sonnet 5: 7.8%. GPT-5.2: 9.0%. Same 778 questions. Under all three judges, Grok 4.3 is the most corrected model in this line-up. For a professional choosing one model for high-stakes work, this gap matters more than context window or speed.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 0 auto 24px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                <strong>The 2M vs 200K tradeoff is real, however.<\/strong> Long-document workflows that exceed Claude&#8217;s 200K context create chunking complexity. Grok ingests the full document in one pass. The recommended pattern: Grok for ingestion plus Claude for summarization, because Grok&#8217;s reasoning variant scores 20.2% on Vectara New Dataset (worst of any frontier model) while Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 10.6%.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 0 auto 24px; max-width: 900px; font-style: italic;\">\n                The optimal configuration for high-stakes professional work is both models, not one. Use Grok to surface contrarian angles and ingest large contexts. Use Claude to filter unverified claims before they reach a decision.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 14px; color: #9ca3af; max-width: 900px; margin: 24px auto 0;\">\n                <a href=\"#\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Read the full Claude dossier \u2192<\/a>\n            <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1100px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Grok vs Gemini<\/div>\n<h2>Bigger context and live X data <br \/>vs stronger factuality scores.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 19px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 40px auto 24px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                Grok brings the bigger context window and live X data. Gemini scores higher on factuality and multimodal benchmarks.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 0 auto 40px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                In the <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#corrected-least\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), the two sit together in the group corrected most. When at least two of three AI judges, from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google, had to agree, GPT, Perplexity and Claude answers were judged corrected by another model on 3 to 4% of answers. Gemini and Grok answers: 6.5% and 7.4%.\n            <\/p>\n<div style=\"overflow: hidden; margin-bottom: 40px;\">\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where Grok leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Context window: 2M tokens vs Gemini 3.1 Pro&#8217;s 1M<\/li>\n<li>Real-time X data<\/li>\n<li>AA-Omniscience domain leads: Health, Science<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: right; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where Gemini leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>FACTS overall: Gemini 3 Pro at 68.8 vs Grok 4 at 53.6<\/li>\n<li>AA-Omniscience accuracy: 55.3% vs 41.4%<\/li>\n<li>AA-Omniscience hallucination: 50% vs 64%<\/li>\n<li>FACTS Multimodal: 46.1 vs 25.7<\/li>\n<li>Content safety record (relative to Grok&#8217;s regulatory exposure)<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"clear: both;\"><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 0 auto 24px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                <strong>The production note:<\/strong> in our top line-up, a blind judge found Claude Opus 5 corrected by another model on 8.7% of its answers. <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/gemini\/\" title=\"Google Gemini 2026: Models, Features, Pricing, and Accuracy\"  data-wpil-monitor-id=\"2515\">Gemini<\/a> 3.1 Pro: 21.6%. Grok 4.3: 21.0%. Same 310 questions.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 0 auto 24px; max-width: 900px; font-style: italic;\">\n                For multi-model workflows, treat Gemini-Grok contradictions as a structured decision input rather than choosing one model. The contradiction set is the surface area where assumptions hide.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 14px; color: #9ca3af; max-width: 900px; margin: 24px auto 0;\">\n                <a href=\"#\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Read the full Gemini dossier \u2192<\/a>\n            <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1100px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Grok vs Perplexity<\/div>\n<h2>The split is information <br \/>access architecture.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 19px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 40px auto 40px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                Grok pulls real-time data from X. Perplexity searches the broader web with grounded retrieval and citation infrastructure. Both surface current information. The implementations are not interchangeable.\n            <\/p>\n<div style=\"overflow: hidden; margin-bottom: 40px;\">\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where Grok leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Real-time X-specific social data (Perplexity does not have this stream)<\/li>\n<li>Agentic depth via Grok 4.20 multi-agent and Heavy configurations<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: right; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Where Perplexity leads<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Citation accuracy: Perplexity Sonar Pro 37% CJR (best) vs Grok-3 94% (worst)<\/li>\n<li>Judged corrected by another model less often: 3.7% of answers vs Grok&#8217;s 7.4% (Divergence Index, Q3 2026)<\/li>\n<li>RAG-native architecture for research grounding<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"clear: both;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-left: 2px solid #8b5cf6; border-radius: 12px; max-width: 900px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.95);\">\n                    <strong>The structural split:<\/strong> Perplexity is built for source-attributed research. Grok-3 fabricated citations 94% of the time on the Columbia Journalism Review test. This is not a tuning issue solved by a system prompt. For any workflow requiring attribution to real sources, Perplexity is the structural fit and Grok is the wrong tool used alone.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 24px auto 0; max-width: 900px; font-style: italic;\">\n                The orchestration pattern is straightforward: Grok surfaces real-time signal from X. Perplexity validates and grounds those claims in citable sources before they reach output.\n            <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 14px; color: #9ca3af; max-width: 900px; margin: 24px auto 0;\">\n                <a href=\"#\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Read the full Perplexity dossier \u2192<\/a>\n            <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Where Grok Genuinely Wins<\/div>\n<h2>The wins are real. <br \/>They are also narrower than the marketing implies.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<ul class=\"feature-list\" style=\"margin-top: 40px;\">\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Speed.<\/strong> Grok consistently ranks fastest among frontier models in independent UX comparisons (Spliiit, April 2026, multi-model timing tests).<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Real-time X access.<\/strong> No other frontier model has direct access to the X content stream. For sentiment analysis, breaking news monitoring, or social media research, this is structurally unique.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Context window.<\/strong> 2M tokens is the largest of consumer-accessible models. Gemini 3.1 Pro&#8217;s 1M is the next largest. Claude&#8217;s 200K is the smallest of the four major contenders.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>AA-Omniscience domain leads:<\/strong> Health and Science. Grok 4 leads these two domains on knowledge calibration despite trailing on overall accuracy. This is reproducible in independent testing.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>HLE and ARC-AGI leadership with Heavy.<\/strong> Grok 4 Heavy scored 44.4% on Humanity&#8217;s Last Exam and 100% on AIME 2025. These scores require multi-agent Heavy mode. They are not directly comparable to single-agent rivals.<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Where Grok Genuinely Loses<\/div>\n<h2>The losses are also real. <br \/>Grok marketing does not surface them.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<ul class=\"feature-list\" style=\"margin-top: 40px;\">\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Citation accuracy.<\/strong> Grok-3 scored 94% citation hallucination on CJR per <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/ai-hallucination-rates-and-benchmarks\/\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind&#8217;s AI Hallucination Rates and Benchmarks reference<\/a>. The worst score of any model tested. Approximately 19 in 20 cited sources contained fabricated claims.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Vectara New Dataset for reasoning variant.<\/strong> Grok 4.1 Fast at 20.2% is the worst score of any frontier model on the harder Vectara dataset. The reasoning variant that handles long-context tasks is the variant that fabricates most when summarizing.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Internal vs external benchmark divergence.<\/strong> xAI claimed 65% hallucination reduction from Grok 4 to Grok 4.1 Fast on internal benchmarks. AA-Omniscience independently measured Grok 4.1 Fast at 72% hallucination rate, worse than Grok 4&#8217;s 64%. The internal claim and the external measurement point in opposite directions.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>FACTS Multimodal.<\/strong> Grok 4 at 25.7 is the weakest score among frontier models on multimodal factuality.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Fewest corrections in a chain.<\/strong> In our top line-up&#8217;s replay for the <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#last-word\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), Claude Opus 5.5 corrected 24 of every 100 earlier answers it followed. Grok 4.3 corrected 3, the fewest of the line-up.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Enterprise API maturity.<\/strong> Less mature than <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/ai-models-knowledge-hub\/\" title=\"AI Models Knowledge Hub\"  data-wpil-monitor-id=\"2787\">ChatGPT or Claude<\/a> on governance, audit logging, and compliance tooling.<\/li>\n<li><span class=\"check\"><\/span><strong>Documented safety incidents.<\/strong> More documented regulatory and safety incidents than any other frontier model in the dataset (EU DSA investigation, UK ICO probe, UK Ofcom statements, AI Forensics CSAM finding).<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1200px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">When to Pick Which Model<\/div>\n<h2>The simple version. <br \/>Use as a starting filter, <br \/>not a substitute for testing.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"overflow: hidden; margin-top: 60px; margin-bottom: 32px;\">\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 32%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Pick Grok alone when<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 15px; line-height: 1.7; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Real-time X\/Twitter data is the core requirement<\/li>\n<li>Speed matters more than calibration<\/li>\n<li>Context exceeds 1M tokens and the task is not citation-dependent<\/li>\n<li>Health or Science knowledge calibration is the dominant constraint<\/li>\n<li>You can verify Grok&#8217;s outputs through another channel before acting<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 32%; margin-left: 2%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Pick Claude alone when<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 15px; line-height: 1.7; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Calibration on high-stakes outputs is non-negotiable<\/li>\n<li>The task requires structured refusal of uncertain claims<\/li>\n<li>Software engineering, legal, or humanities work is the core domain<\/li>\n<li>Document fidelity matters more than document size<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 32%; margin-left: 2%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Pick ChatGPT alone when<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 15px; line-height: 1.7; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Enterprise governance and audit are required<\/li>\n<li>Polished UX for non-technical end users matters<\/li>\n<li>Document-grounded factuality (FACTS at 61.8) is the dominant metric<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"clear: both;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"overflow: hidden; margin-bottom: 40px;\">\n<div style=\"float: left; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Pick Gemini alone when<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 15px; line-height: 1.7; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Multimodal factuality is core (FACTS Multimodal 46.1)<\/li>\n<li>Native Google Workspace integration is required<\/li>\n<li>Overall AA-Omni accuracy at 55.3% beats the alternatives<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<div style=\"float: right; width: 49%; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px; box-sizing: border-box;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Pick Perplexity alone when<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 15px; line-height: 1.7; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85);\">\n<li>Source-attributed research is the deliverable<\/li>\n<li>Citation accuracy is the audit point<\/li>\n<li>RAG-native grounding outperforms internal-knowledge models for the task<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"clear: both;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"padding: 40px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-left: 2px solid #8b5cf6; border-radius: 12px;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 22px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600;\">Use multiple models when<\/h4>\n<ul style=\"margin: 0; padding-left: 20px; font-size: 17px; line-height: 1.7; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9);\">\n<li>The decision is high-stakes<\/li>\n<li>Different parts of the task have different model fits<\/li>\n<li>You need to surface assumptions, not just confirm them<\/li>\n<li>Citations and contrarian insight both matter<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 20px 0 0 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.85); font-style: italic;\">\n                    On high-stakes questions, AI models draw more corrections, and their answers read about as sure: in the <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#stakes\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), a blind judge found a correction in 45% of high-stakes turns, against 28% of low-stakes ones, at the same point in the conversation.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Orchestration Patterns<\/div>\n<h2>How to combine Grok <br \/>with other models. Five patterns.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 19px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 40px 0 40px 0;\">\n                Five patterns emerge from production multi-model usage. Each closes a specific gap that single-model use creates.\n            <\/p>\n<div style=\"margin-bottom: 24px; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600; color: #8b5cf6;\">Pattern 1: Citation-dependent research<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 17px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9);\">\n                    Pair Grok&#8217;s real-time X signal and Health\/Science domain strength with Perplexity&#8217;s citation architecture. Grok-3 scored 94% citation hallucination on CJR. Perplexity Sonar Pro scored 37%. Use Grok to surface real-time claims. Use Perplexity to ground those claims in citable sources before they reach output.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"margin-bottom: 24px; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600; color: #8b5cf6;\">Pattern 2: High-stakes business strategy decisions<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 17px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9);\">\n                    Pair Grok&#8217;s contrarian angles with Claude&#8217;s conservative refusal behavior. The combined workflow keeps Grok&#8217;s signal while Claude filters unverified claims before they reach the decision.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"margin-bottom: 24px; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600; color: #8b5cf6;\">Pattern 3: Document-grounded summarization<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 17px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9);\">\n                    Pair Grok&#8217;s 2M token context window with Claude&#8217;s document faithfulness. Grok&#8217;s reasoning variant scores 20.2% on Vectara New Dataset (worst of any frontier model). Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores 10.6%. Grok ingests the full context. Claude summarizes without fabricating clause-level details.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"margin-bottom: 24px; padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600; color: #8b5cf6;\">Pattern 4: Business strategy and marketing, paired with Gemini<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 17px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9);\">\n                    For business strategy, technical, marketing and creative tasks, pair Grok&#8217;s contrarian angles with Gemini&#8217;s factual breadth. Surface the contradictions as structured decision inputs rather than treating either model as authoritative.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div style=\"padding: 32px; border: 2px solid rgba(255,255,255,0.08); border-radius: 12px;\">\n<h4 style=\"font-size: 20px; margin: 0 0 16px 0; font-weight: 600; color: #8b5cf6;\">Pattern 5: Financial analysis where correction rates are highest<\/h4>\n<p style=\"font-size: 17px; line-height: 1.7; margin: 0; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9);\">\n                    Supplement Grok with Perplexity&#8217;s citation grounding. In the Suprmind <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#topics\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), high-stakes, financial and legal questions drew the most corrections. Grok surfaces novel angles. Perplexity checks the claims behind them against citable sources.\n                <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.7; color: #9ca3af; margin: 40px 0 0 0; font-style: italic; text-align: center;\">\n                These patterns come from production multi-model use on Suprmind.\n            <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div style=\"max-width: 1300px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div style=\"text-align: center;\">\n<div class=\"section-label\">Five-Model Comparison Matrix<\/div>\n<h2>The whole picture, at once.<\/h2>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p style=\"font-size: 19px; line-height: 1.8; color: rgba(255,255,255,0.9); margin: 40px auto 60px; max-width: 900px;\">\n                Source: <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/ai-hallucination-rates-and-benchmarks\/\" style=\"color: #8b5cf6;\">Suprmind&#8217;s AI Hallucination Rates and Benchmarks reference<\/a> (May 2026 update).\n            <\/p>\n<div class=\"comparison-table comparison-table-6\" style=\"max-width: 1200px; margin: 0 auto;\">\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">Metric<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Grok 4<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">GPT-5<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Claude 4.1 Opus<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Gemini 3.1 Pro<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Perplexity Sonar Pro<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">Context window<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">2M<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">1.05M<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">200K<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">1M<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Variable<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">Real-time data<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">X (native)<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Web (browse)<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Web (tool)<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Web (tool)<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Web (RAG-native)<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">AA-Omni hallucination<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">64%<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">~78%<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">0%<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">50%<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Not reported<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">CJR citation hallucination<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">94% (worst)<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">67%<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Lower<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">76%<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">37% (best)<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">FACTS overall<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">53.6<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">61.8<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">High<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">68.8<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Not reported<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">Standalone API plan<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Yes<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Yes<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Yes<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Yes<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Yes<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-row\">\n<div class=\"comparison-feature\">Best-fit task<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Real-time X, large context<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">General enterprise<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">High-stakes calibration<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Multimodal factuality<\/div>\n<div class=\"comparison-value\">Cited research<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"faq\" aria-labelledby=\"faq-heading\">\n<p class=\"section-label\">FAQ<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"faq-heading\">Grok vs Other AI Models: Frequently Asked Questions<\/h2>\n<div class=\"faq-accordion\">\n<details class=\"faq-item\" open>\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Is Grok better than ChatGPT?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">It depends on the task. Grok is faster and leads on real-time X data. ChatGPT leads on document-grounded tasks (FACTS 61.8 vs 53.6), enterprise API maturity, and use case breadth. On AA-Omniscience knowledge calibration, Grok 4 (64%) hallucinates less than GPT-5.2 (~78%), but both trail Claude 4.1 Opus (0%). For workflows where current X sentiment matters, Grok leads. For document analysis and citation-dependent work, ChatGPT leads.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Is Grok better than Claude?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">For different things. Grok offers 2M tokens, faster responses, and X data. Claude leads on calibration (0% hallucination on AA-Omniscience vs Grok 4&#8217;s 64%) and citation accuracy. In the Suprmind <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#corrected-least\">Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), Claude answers were judged corrected by another model on 4.3% of answers and Grok answers on 7.4%, when at least two of three AI judges had to agree. The optimal use is both, not one.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>How does Grok compare to Gemini?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">Grok and <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/gemini\/pricing\/\" title=\"Gemini Pricing 2026: Free, AI Plus, AI Pro, AI Ultra, and API Costs\"  data-wpil-monitor-id=\"2526\">Gemini<\/a> sit together in the group of models corrected most by other models. In the Suprmind <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#corrected-least\">Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), Gemini answers were judged corrected by another model on 6.5% of answers and Grok answers on 7.4%, when at least two of three AI judges had to agree. Gemini 3.1 Pro leads AA-Omniscience accuracy (55.3% vs 41.4%) and has the lower AA-Omniscience hallucination rate (50% vs 64%). Grok has 2M context (vs 1M). Grok offers X data. Gemini does not.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Should I use Grok for coding?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">Grok 4 is competitive on coding benchmarks (88.9% GPQA Diamond on Heavy), but Claude 4.1 Opus leads Software Engineering on AA-Omniscience accuracy and Claude Opus 4.7 leads SWE-bench Verified at 87.6%. For code review, Claude&#8217;s low hallucination rate makes it the safer sole-model choice. Grok contributes alternative implementation approaches in an ensemble.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Why does Grok give different answers than Claude or ChatGPT on the same question?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">Different models draw on different training data, architectures, and calibration philosophies. In the Suprmind <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#confidence\">Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), an AI answer a blind judge read as confident was contradicted by the other models more often, but was not judged corrected any more often. Divergence tells you where to look. Evidence tells you who was right.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Which AI <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/ai-models-index\/\" title=\"AI Models Index\" data-wpil-monitor-id=\"3380\">model has the lowest hallucination rate<\/a>?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">Claude 4.1 Opus on AA-Omniscience (0%), achieved by refusing rather than guessing. On Vectara New Dataset, Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 10.6% leads; Grok 4.1 Fast at 20.2% trails. On CJR citation accuracy, Perplexity Sonar Pro at 37% leads; Grok-3 at 94% trails. Per Suprmind&#8217;s AI Hallucination Rates and Benchmarks reference, no single model leads all benchmarks. The lowest hallucination rate depends on which type of hallucination the workflow needs to prevent.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Which <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/strongest-ai\/\" title=\"Strongest AI\"  data-wpil-monitor-id=\"2534\">AI model is best<\/a> for research?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">Perplexity for source-attributed research where citations are the deliverable (37% CJR error rate, the lowest tested). Claude for synthesis where calibration matters more than current data. Grok adds value as a contrarian voice in research workflows but should not be the sole model for citation-dependent work given Grok-3&#8217;s 94% CJR score.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Why does Grok have a 2M context window when other models have less?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">Architecture choices. xAI prioritized large context as a differentiator and built Grok 4 with 2M tokens (256K via API). Anthropic&#8217;s 200K reflects different priorities around quality at long context. Gemini 3.1 Pro&#8217;s 1M is the next largest. Context window is one constraint among many: Grok&#8217;s reasoning variant scores 20.2% on Vectara New Dataset, meaning the variant that handles long-context tasks adds unsupported inferences during summarization at the highest rate of any frontier model.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Should I use multiple AI models or pick one?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">For most professional work, multiple. In the Suprmind <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#methods\">Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), real agreement is rare: in 32 of the 13,563 questions our production judge read (0.2%), no model added, corrected or contradicted anything. The exception is low-stakes routine work where speed matters more than accuracy.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details class=\"faq-item\">\n<summary class=\"faq-question\">\n                    <span>Which AI model gets corrected by other AI models least?<\/span><br \/>\n                    <span class=\"faq-icon\" aria-hidden=\"true\">+<\/span><br \/>\n                <\/summary>\n<div class=\"faq-answer\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px;\">Per the Suprmind <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/multi-model-ai-divergence-index\/#corrected-least\">Multi-Model AI Divergence Index<\/a> (Q3 2026 Edition), when at least two of three AI judges had to agree, <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/chatgpt\/pricing\/\" title=\"ChatGPT Pricing 2026: What You Actually Get on Each Tier\"  data-wpil-monitor-id=\"2664\">GPT<\/a>, Perplexity and Claude answers were judged corrected by another model on 3 to 4% of answers, against 6.5% for Gemini and 7.4% for Grok. A judge&#8217;s call is a reading, not proof that an answer was wrong.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/details><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 100px 48px;\">\n<div class=\"cta-section\">\n<h2>The optimal configuration is both. <br \/>Suprmind makes that practical.<\/h2>\n<p class=\"cta-subtitle\">\n                In Suprmind&#8217;s Q3 2026 data, a blind judge found at least one correction between AI models in 35.8% of 17,885 real questions. Suprmind runs Grok alongside ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity in one shared conversation, and shows you where they disagree before you act on any of them.\n            <\/p>\n<div class=\"hero-cta-group\">\n                <a href=\"\/signup\/spark\" class=\"btn-white\">Start Your Free Trial<\/a><br \/>\n                <a href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/platform\/\" class=\"btn-white\">See How Suprmind Works<\/a>\n            <\/div>\n<p style=\"margin-top: 24px; font-size: 14px; opacity: 0.7;\">7-day free trial. All five frontier models. No credit card required.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section style=\"padding: 40px 48px; text-align: center;\">\n<p style=\"font-size: 16px; color: #e5e7eb; font-weight: 500; margin-bottom: 8px;\">\n            Disagreement is the feature.\n        <\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 14px; color: #e5e7eb; font-style: italic;\">\n            Last verified September 2026. Next refresh due December 2026.\n        <\/p>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A benchmark-cited 2026 comparison of Grok against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows, citation accuracy, and production contradiction data. Includes honest wins and losses, orchestration patterns, a five-model matrix, and guidance on when to use one model versus combining several.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7778,"parent":5074,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"wpai_generated_summary":"","wpai_meta_description":"","footnotes":""},"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5120","page","type-page","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t<!-- All in One SEO Pro 5.0.4 - aioseo.com -->\n\t<meta name=\"description\" content=\"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"max-image-preview:large\" \/>\n\t<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"generator\" content=\"All in One SEO Pro (AIOSEO) 5.0.4\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Suprmind - Multi AI Conversational Platform for Professionals\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"website\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"fb:app_id\" content=\"27404668069175546\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"fb:admins\" content=\"567083258\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image:secure_url\" content=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1600\" \/>\n\t\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"900\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@suprmind_ai\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@RadomirBasta\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Radomir Basta\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n\t\t<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"aioseo-schema\">\n\t\t\t{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#breadcrumblist\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/#listItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Grok by xAI: Complete Guide to Models, Features and Pricing\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/\",\"nextItem\":{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#listItem\",\"name\":\"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity 2026\"}},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#listItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity 2026\",\"previousItem\":{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/#listItem\",\"name\":\"Grok by xAI: Complete Guide to Models, Features and Pricing\"}}]},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Suprmind\",\"description\":\"Suprmind is the multi-model AI decision intelligence chat platform for professionals who cannot afford wrong AI answers. Five frontier models - GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Perplexity - challenge and collaborate in a single conversation thread - each model sees and builds on all previous responses, so hallucinations and errors get caught before they reach your strategy, report, or deal. You ask hard questions, they argue, you win. Disagreement is the feature.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/\",\"email\":\"hello@suprmind.ai\",\"foundingDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"numberOfEmployees\":{\"@type\":\"QuantitativeValue\",\"minValue\":1,\"maxValue\":4},\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/02\\\/suprmind-slash-new-bold-italic.png?wsr\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#organizationLogo\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1822,\"caption\":\"Suprmind\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#organizationLogo\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/suprmind.platform\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/suprmind_ai\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/suprmind.ai\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/company\\\/suprmind\\\/\"]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/\",\"name\":\"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind\",\"description\":\"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/#website\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#breadcrumblist\"},\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#mainImage\",\"width\":1600,\"height\":900,\"caption\":\"Grok Alternative\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/grok\\\/grok-comparison\\\/#mainImage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-07T18:21:50+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-06T17:47:04+00:00\"},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/\",\"name\":\"Suprmind\",\"alternateName\":\"Suprmind.ai\",\"description\":\"Multi AI Conversational Platform for Professionals\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/suprmind.ai\\\/hub\\\/#organization\"}}]}\n\t\t<\/script>\n\t\t<!-- All in One SEO Pro -->\r\n\t\t<title>Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind<\/title>\n\n","aioseo_head_json":{"title":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind","description":"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction","canonical_url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/","robots":"max-image-preview:large","keywords":"","webmasterTools":{"miscellaneous":""},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#breadcrumblist","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/#listItem","position":1,"name":"Grok by xAI: Complete Guide to Models, Features and Pricing","item":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/","nextItem":{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#listItem","name":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity 2026"}},{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#listItem","position":2,"name":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity 2026","previousItem":{"@type":"ListItem","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/#listItem","name":"Grok by xAI: Complete Guide to Models, Features and Pricing"}}]},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/#organization","name":"Suprmind","description":"Suprmind is the multi-model AI decision intelligence chat platform for professionals who cannot afford wrong AI answers. Five frontier models - GPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Perplexity - challenge and collaborate in a single conversation thread - each model sees and builds on all previous responses, so hallucinations and errors get caught before they reach your strategy, report, or deal. You ask hard questions, they argue, you win. Disagreement is the feature.","url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/","email":"hello@suprmind.ai","foundingDate":"2025-08-01","numberOfEmployees":{"@type":"QuantitativeValue","minValue":1,"maxValue":4},"logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/suprmind-slash-new-bold-italic.png?wsr","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#organizationLogo","width":1920,"height":1822,"caption":"Suprmind"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#organizationLogo"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/suprmind.platform","https:\/\/x.com\/suprmind_ai","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/suprmind.ai","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/suprmind\/"]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/","name":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind","description":"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction","inLanguage":"en-US","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/#website"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#breadcrumblist"},"image":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#mainImage","width":1600,"height":900,"caption":"Grok Alternative"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/#mainImage"},"datePublished":"2026-05-07T18:21:50+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-06T17:47:04+00:00"},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/#website","url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/","name":"Suprmind","alternateName":"Suprmind.ai","description":"Multi AI Conversational Platform for Professionals","inLanguage":"en-US","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/#organization"}}]},"og:locale":"en_US","og:site_name":"Suprmind - Multi AI Conversational Platform for Professionals","og:type":"website","og:title":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind","og:description":"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction","og:url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/","fb:app_id":"27404668069175546","fb:admins":"567083258","og:image":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr","og:image:secure_url":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr","og:image:width":1600,"og:image:height":900,"twitter:card":"summary_large_image","twitter:site":"@suprmind_ai","twitter:title":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind","twitter:description":"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction","twitter:creator":"@RadomirBasta","twitter:image":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/grok-alternative_suprmind.webp?wsr","twitter:label1":"Written by","twitter:data1":"Radomir Basta","twitter:label2":"Est. reading time","twitter:data2":"15 minutes"},"aioseo_meta_data":{"post_id":"5120","title":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini Comparison 2026 - Suprmind","description":"2026 benchmark-cited Grok comparison against ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, covering hallucination rates, context windows and production contradiction","keywords":null,"keyphrases":{"focus":{"keyphrase":"grok comparison","score":66},"additional":[]},"canonical_url":null,"og_title":null,"og_description":null,"og_object_type":"default","og_image_type":"default","og_image_custom_url":null,"og_image_custom_fields":null,"og_video":"","og_custom_url":null,"og_article_section":null,"og_article_tags":null,"twitter_use_og":true,"twitter_card":"default","twitter_image_type":"default","twitter_image_custom_url":null,"twitter_image_custom_fields":null,"twitter_title":null,"twitter_description":null,"schema_type":null,"schema_type_options":null,"pillar_content":false,"robots_default":true,"robots_noindex":false,"robots_noarchive":false,"robots_nosnippet":false,"robots_nofollow":false,"robots_noimageindex":false,"robots_noodp":false,"robots_notranslate":false,"robots_max_snippet":"-1","robots_max_videopreview":"-1","robots_max_imagepreview":"none","tabs":null,"priority":null,"frequency":"default","local_seo":null,"seo_analyzer_scan_date":"2026-10-06 17:48:45","created":"2026-05-07 18:21:52","updated":"2026-10-27 08:52:55","og_image_url":null,"twitter_image_url":null,"primary_term":null,"og_image_width":null,"og_image_height":null,"schema":{"blockGraphs":[],"customGraphs":[],"default":{"data":{"Article":[],"Course":[],"Dataset":[],"FAQPage":[],"Movie":[],"Person":[],"Product":[],"ProductReview":[],"Car":[],"Recipe":[],"Service":[],"SoftwareApplication":[],"WebPage":[]},"graphName":"WebPage","isEnabled":true},"graphs":[]},"limit_modified_date":false,"ai":{"faqs":[],"keyPoints":[],"schemas":[],"titles":[],"descriptions":[],"socialPosts":{"email":{"subject":"","preview":"","content":""},"linkedin":[],"twitter":[],"facebook":[],"instagram":[]}},"breadcrumb_settings":null,"focus_keyword":"grok comparison","additional_keywords":null,"truseo_locale":null},"aioseo_breadcrumb":null,"aioseo_breadcrumb_json":[{"label":"Grok by xAI: Complete Guide to Models, Features and Pricing","link":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/"},{"label":"Grok vs ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity 2026","link":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/grok\/grok-comparison\/"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5120","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5120"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5120\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8746,"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5120\/revisions\/8746"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5074"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7778"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5120"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suprmind.ai\/hub\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5120"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}