At work, Grok vs Claude is decided less by the model than by two questions: where does your data live, and where do you work? According to xAI, Grok is closely tied to X, searches the web and X live, and for new customers comes in one subscription together with Cursor and X, The X Subscription: Plus costs $8, Premium $30, Super $100 and Ultra $200 a month. Claude Pro costs $20 a month ($17 when billed annually), Max $100 or $200, and includes Claude Code and Cowork, agents that work in your own files. On the API, the current Grok model grok-4.7 costs $2 per million input and $6 per million output tokens, Claude Sonnet 5.5 $2 and $10, Claude Opus 5.5 $4 and $20. On privacy, both vendors say in their own docs that they do not train on API data. For company data from the EU, Claude is easier to check: on the commercial plans and the API, the Data Processing Addendum is a readable part of the Commercial Terms. xAI also points to such an addendum, but its legal pages could not be reached when I retrieved them. Neither API documents an EU endpoint, and according to xAI Grok Bot's computers run in the United States. On top of that, there are two inquiries by the Irish Data Protection Commission and one by the European Commission that concern Grok and X. None of the authorities has found an infringement so far. Everything as of October 26, 2026.
I work with Claude every day and run my team of fourteen AI employees on it. I did not test Grok myself for this article; everything about Grok here comes from xAI's and Cursor's documentation and from the authorities' announcements, retrieved on October 26, 2026. This is a documentation comparison, not a test. Everything else about Claude is collected on my Claude page.
Grok or Claude: the short answer in one table
The last row is my assessment; all others come from the vendors' pages as of October 26, 2026.
Who is behind Grok and which models are current
Grok is xAI's model family. The developer docs now call the vendor "SpaceXSI (xAI)". The current model is grok-4.7, released in September 2026, with a 500k token context window, text and image input and a knowledge cutoff of May 2026. xAI explicitly recommends it for code, chat and agents. Before it came grok-4.6 in August and grok-4.5 in July; there is no "Grok 5" in the docs. For code there is also grok-build-0.1, the model behind Grok Build.
Anthropic has four current models side by side: Claude Fable 5.1 for demanding reasoning and long agent runs, Opus 5.5 as the default recommendation, Sonnet 5.5 as the middle ground between speed and capability, and Haiku 5.5 for high volume. According to Anthropic all four have a 1M token context window. How they differ is in Claude Models: Opus, Sonnet, Haiku, Fable.
You won't find a ranking of which model is "smarter" here. Vendor benchmarks are not a measurement under your conditions, and I have not run my own comparison with Grok.
Grok vs Claude pricing: subscription and API
The subscription prices are quick to compare, the contents are not. The X Subscription bundles Grok, Cursor and X, and according to xAI new customers start there directly. Grok and Cursor share a weekly usage pool; paid individual plans include X benefits once you connect a personal X account. Grok Bot is only included from Premium; Plus does not include it. Existing SuperGrok, Cursor and X Premium subscriptions continue, switching is optional and, according to xAI, permanent. One detail matters for Claude users: if you use a Claude or GPT model inside Cursor, xAI says you pay API list prices from your prepaid credit from the first use, not from the included pool.
Claude Pro costs $20 a month and includes Claude Code and Cowork. Max comes with five or twenty times the usage of Pro for $100 or $200. What Claude's free plan can do is in Claude Free Plan: What You Get.
On the API, Grok is cheaper on output tokens. Below 200k prompt tokens grok-4.7 costs $2 per million input and $6 per million output tokens, above that double. Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs $2 and $10, Opus 5.5 $4 and $20, Fable 5.1 $10 and $50. What the difference means for a given volume depends on the ratio of input to output and on how often a model has to redo its work. Only your own tasks can measure that. How to start with Anthropic is in Claude API Key: Setup, Pricing, First Call. All Grok plans, tool prices and a sample calculation are in Grok Pricing: Plans, Grok Bot and API.
Agents: Grok Bot vs Cowork and Claude Code
Since August 2026 xAI has had Grok Bot, an agent that competes directly with the idea of AI employees. xAI describes it as AI teammates with names, jobs and memory that work on a persistent cloud computer with a browser, file system and terminal. According to xAI the computers run in Cursor's cloud and "in the United States today". All of a user's Bots share one computer, including files and logins.
Claude Cowork is Anthropic's counterpart without a terminal: you describe an outcome, Claude works on Anthropic's servers in an isolated environment and reaches the folders you connect through the desktop app. What Cowork can do is in Claude Cowork: What It Does, Who It's For; the proactive agent Duet is covered in Claude Duet: What Anthropic's Agent Does.
My own approach is a third one: my AI employees are folders with rules, a personnel file and skills that run through Claude Code. That keeps the description of their work with me rather than in a vendor's interface. What that looks like is in My AI Workforce: Fourteen Employees, One Boss.
Grok vs Claude for coding: Grok Build vs Claude Code
For code, xAI has Grok Build, a coding agent for the terminal with a full-screen interface, a headless mode for scripts and the Agent Client Protocol for other apps. According to the release notes it launched as a beta in May 2026. The enterprise docs even explain how sign-in settings from Claude Code map to Grok Build. The faster variant, Grok 4.7 Fast, is only available in Cursor and Grok Build, at twice the token price.
I use Claude Code daily and have not tested Grok Build. You only get a fair comparison of two coding agents with the same tasks in the same repository. The tools I have compared are in Claude Code, Codex or Copilot: Which One? and Claude Code vs Cursor: Which Fits You?. Where Grok Build sits among the other options is covered in Claude Code Alternatives.
Privacy and processing location
This isn't legal advice, just the operator's perspective I use to choose AI tools for my own business and real client data.
API. xAI writes: "SpaceXSI never trains on your API inputs or outputs without your explicit permission." By default, xAI stores requests and responses for 30 days for abuse reviews; with Zero Data Retention for the whole team that stops, but features such as the Batch API and stored files go away. The default endpoint does not guarantee a processing location. There is a US endpoint at a 10% surcharge, only for grok-4.7 and grok-4.6 and without images, video, voice, tools and files; the regions page names no EU endpoint. The Imagine page mentions "EU data residency options" without details. For the Data Processing Addendum, xAI points to its legal pages, which could not be reached when I retrieved them. To its own FAQ question about GDPR and SOC 2, xAI answers only with its SOC 2 Type 2 certification and points to a trust center open to customers with a signed NDA. For commercial products, Anthropic says in its Privacy Center that it does not train on your data by default, its Data Processing Addendum is incorporated into the Commercial Terms by reference, and inference can be pinned to "global" or "us"; the Anthropic API offers no EU location either.
Grok Bot. Grok Bot follows Cursor's data and account settings. Cursor's older privacy mode ("Legacy Privacy Mode") is not supported because Grok Bot needs cloud storage. According to xAI, Cursor's US-only data residency program does not apply to Grok Bot by default.
Inquiries. On April 11, 2025, the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) opened an inquiry into whether public X posts by EU and EEA users were lawfully processed to train the Grok models, and on February 17, 2026 a second one into the apparent creation of potentially harmful, non-consensual intimate or sexualised images with the Grok functionality on X. Since January 26, 2026 the European Commission has been investigating under the Digital Services Act whether X assessed and mitigated the risks before deploying Grok's functionalities. The Commission itself writes: "The opening of formal proceedings does not prejudge its outcome." As of October 26, 2026 no decision has been published in any of the three. In an older DSA case against X from December 2023, the Commission fined X €120 million on December 5, 2025 on other points; that did not concern Grok. What that means for companies, with a checklist, is in Grok and GDPR: A Checklist for Companies.
For Claude, settings, retention and data processing terms are in Claude Privacy and GDPR: What Applies. What role Amazon Bedrock plays when processing in the EU is a hard requirement for you is in Claude on AWS Bedrock: EU, GDPR and Cost.
What I would use for what
This is my assessment as a Claude user, not a measurement.
Grok is interesting if real time on X is at the core of your work, such as topic and sentiment research, if you need images and video from the same source, or if you already pay for Cursor and so have Grok Bot in your plan. I pick Claude as soon as client data is involved, as soon as the work should happen in my own folders, and as soon as I need rules that stay the same for weeks. For my workforce the question was never Grok or Claude, but platform or my own folder. How other models compare with Claude is also in Claude vs Gemini 2026: Compared and Copilot vs Claude: What Works at the Office.
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok or Claude better?
It depends on your work, not on a ranking. Grok brings live search on X, image and video generation and a plan bundled with Cursor and X. Claude brings agents for your own files and a business offering with a readable data processing addendum in its Commercial Terms. I have not run my own performance test.
How much does Grok cost compared to Claude?
The X Subscription costs $8, $30, $100 or $200 a month; Grok Bot starts at $30. Claude Pro costs $20, Max $100 or $200. On the API, grok-4.7 costs $2 and $6 per million input and output tokens, Claude Sonnet 5.5 $2 and $10, Opus 5.5 $4 and $20 (as of October 26, 2026).
Is Grok better than Claude for coding?
I can't show that. xAI recommends grok-4.7 for code and offers its own coding agent, Grok Build, which launched as a beta in May 2026. I work with Claude Code and have not tested Grok Build. Compare them with the same tasks in your own repository.
Can I use Grok at work in line with the GDPR?
I can't decide that for you, and this isn't legal advice. What is documented: xAI does not train on API data without permission, stores it for 30 days by default, names no EU endpoint, points to legal pages I could not open for its data processing agreement, and Grok Bot runs on computers in the United States. Settle data processing terms and processing location in writing before client data goes in.
Is there Claude in Grok, or Grok in Claude?
Not directly. In Cursor you can use Claude models next to Grok; on The X Subscription, xAI says you pay for them at API list prices from your credit. Claude itself offers no Grok models.
Where to go from here
Take three tasks from your actual week that you do yourself today and give them to both tools with the same wording. Before you do, decide which data is allowed in; the three questions I ask for that are in AI and Privacy: What the AI Gets to See. If you then want Claude not just to answer but to work for you, I show how my AI employees are built in my German-speaking community Claude Practitioners.
