// head_to_head

GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) vs SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) and SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 are priced within ~10% of each other.

GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

openai

GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613)

Blended / 1M
$1.25
Context
4K
Released
Jan 25, 2024
Overall score
Not evaluated
tool calling

x-ai

SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1

Blended / 1M
$1.25
Context
256K
Released
May 20, 2026
Overall score
67.8
reasoningtool callingimage inputfile inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricGPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613)SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

67.8
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.0144
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$1.25$1.25
Input price / 1M$1.00$1.00
Output price / 1M$2.00$2.00
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.200
Context window4K256Kwin
Max output tokens4K230Kwin

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) on top, SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
45.8
Coding
65.4
Reasoning
76.4
Mathematics
78.4
Data analysis
70.8
Language
72.5
Instruction following
65.2

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadGPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613)SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$400.00/mo$342.40/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$920.00/mo$600.00/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$960.00/mo$512.00/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$1,150/mo$1,110/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$2,700/mo$2,300/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You need to fit large documents in one call

SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1

Wider context window — 256K against 4K.

GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) vs SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 FAQ

Which is better, GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) or SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1?

GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) and SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 are priced within ~10% of each other. GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) cheaper than SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1?

They cost about the same. Both land near $1.25 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

Does GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) or SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 have a bigger context window?

SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 has the larger context window: 4K for GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) against 256K for SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1. Note that a window you can fill is not a window you should fill — retrieval quality usually degrades well before the limit, and you pay for every token you put in it.

Do GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613) and SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 support prompt caching?

SpaceXAI: Grok Build 0.1 publishes a cached-input rate of $0.200 per million tokens against a full input rate of $1.00. The catalogue lists no separate cached rate for GPT-3.5 Turbo (older v0613), which means the provider does not price it separately here — not that caching is unavailable.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.