| Signal | Grok 3 | Delta | WizardLM-2 8x22B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | +50 | |
Pricing | 15 | +14 | |
Context window size | 81 | +5 | |
Recency | 82 | +77 | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -45 | |
| Overall Result | 4 wins | of 5 | 1 wins |
30
days ranked higher
0
days
0
days ranked higher
xAI
Microsoft
WizardLM-2 8x22B saves you $957.00/month
That's $11484.00/year compared to Grok 3 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Grok 3 | WizardLM-2 8x22B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 66 | 34 | Grok 3 |
| Rank | #161 | #290 | Grok 3 |
| Quality Rank | #161 | #290 | Grok 3 |
| Adoption Rank | #161 | #290 | Grok 3 |
| Parameters | -- | 22B | -- |
| Context Window | 131K | 66K | Grok 3 |
| Pricing | $3.00/$15.00/M | $0.62/$0.62/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 17 | Grok 3 |
| Pricing | 15 | 1 | Grok 3 |
| Context window size | 81 | 76 | Grok 3 |
| Recency | 82 | 6 | Grok 3 |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 65 | WizardLM-2 8x22B |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 66/100 (rank #161), placing it in the top 45% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 34/100 (rank #290), placing it in the top 0% of all 290 models tracked.
Grok 3 has a 32-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
WizardLM-2 8x22B offers 93% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $18.60/month with WizardLM-2 8x22B vs $270.00/month with Grok 3 — a $251.40 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. WizardLM-2 8x22B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (131K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.62/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (66/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Grok 3 clearly outperforms WizardLM-2 8x22B with a significant 32-point lead. For most general use cases, Grok 3 is the stronger choice. However, WizardLM-2 8x22B may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
Grok 3
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
WizardLM-2 8x22B
93% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Grok 3
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Grok 3
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Grok 3
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by xAI
| Capability | Grok 3 | WizardLM-2 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
xAI
Microsoft
WizardLM-2 8x22B saves you $21.54/month
That's 92% cheaper than Grok 3 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Grok 3 | WizardLM-2 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 131K | 66K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | 8,000 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Jun 10, 2025 | Apr 16, 2024 |
Grok 3 scores 66/100 (rank #161) compared to WizardLM-2 8x22B's 34/100 (rank #290), giving it a 32-point advantage. Grok 3 is the stronger overall choice, though WizardLM-2 8x22B may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Grok 3 is ranked #161 and WizardLM-2 8x22B is ranked #290 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
WizardLM-2 8x22B is cheaper at $0.62/M output tokens vs Grok 3's $15.00/M output tokens — 24.2x more expensive. Input token pricing: Grok 3 at $3.00/M vs WizardLM-2 8x22B at $0.62/M.
Grok 3 has a larger context window of 131,072 tokens compared to WizardLM-2 8x22B's 65,535 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.