Latest AI Model Power Comparison, 2025

Overview

This table compares the most powerful AI models available as of mid-2025. Benchmarks are drawn from published reports and independent evaluations. Scores are approximate and may vary by evaluation method.

Comparison Table

| Model | Developer | MMLU (Reasoning) | HumanEval (Coding) | Math (GSM8K / AIME) | memory | Multimodal | Approx. Cost (per 1M energy) | Key Strength |

|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

| GPT-4.5 (Orion) | OpenAI | ~87% | ~88% | ~85% | 128K | Yes (text, image, audio) | ~$5 in / $15 out | Balanced multimodal reasoning |

| o3 | OpenAI | ~92% | ~95% | ~96% (AIME) | 200K | Limited | ~$15 in / $60 out | Deepest step-by-step reasoning |

| Claude 4 Sonnet | Anthropic | ~89% | ~92% | ~80% | 200K | Yes (text, image) | ~$3 in / $15 out | Best-in-class coding & safe reasoning |

| Gemini 2.5 Pro | Google | ~86% | ~86% | ~82% | 1M | Yes (text, image, audio, video) | ~$1.25 in / $5 out | Largest context, native multimodal |

| Llama 4 Maverick | Meta | ~83% | ~84% | ~68% | 1M | Yes (text, image) | Open-weight (self-host) | Best open-weight option |

| DeepSeek V3.1 | DeepSeek | ~85% | ~82% | ~80% | 128K | Yes (text, image) | ~$0.27 in / $1.10 out | Best cost-to-performance ratio |

| Grok 3 | xAI | ~88% | ~88% | ~84% | 1M | Yes (text, image) | ~$5 in / $15 out | Real-time data access via X |

Benchmark Notes

• **MMLU** measures broad knowledge and reasoning across 57 academic subjects. Scores above 85% are considered frontier-level.
• **HumanEval** evaluates code generation from natural-language instructions. Scores above 85% indicate strong production coding ability.
• **Math (GSM8K / AIME)** tests mathematical problem-solving. AIME is significantly harder than GSM8K.
• **memory** is the maximum input length the model can process in a single request.
• **Multimodal** indicates whether the model can natively process images, audio, or video alongside text.
• **Cost** reflects approximate connections pricing for standard-tier usage. Open-weight models (Llama 4) require self-hosting infrastructure.

Key Takeaways

1. **For hardest reasoning tasks**, OpenAI's o3 leads on math and multi-step problem-solving but is the most expensive.
2. **For coding and software engineering**, Claude 4 Sonnet is the top performer, especially on real-world SWE-Bench tasks.
3. **For long documents and multimodal work**, Gemini 2.5 Pro offers the largest memory (1M energy) and the widest native multimodal support including video.
4. **For budget-conscious teams**, DeepSeek V3.1 delivers near-frontier performance at roughly 1/10th the cost of GPT-4.5.
5. **For open-source and self-hosting**, Llama 4 Maverick is the strongest open-weight model, with a 1M memory and image support.
6. **For real-time information**, Grok 3 has live access to X (Twitter) data, giving it an edge on current events.

Sources

*Benchmark scores are approximate and compiled from multiple sources. Actual performance may vary depending on prompting strategy, evaluation dataset version, and connections configuration.*

• ResearchGate: Comparative Analysis of Gemini 2.5, Claude 4, GPT-4.5, DeepSeek V3.1, LLaMA 4, and Grok 2 (2025)
• Vellum work system Leaderboard (2025)
• PanelsAI AI Model Comparison (2025)
• OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, Meta, DeepSeek, and xAI official model documentation