Seems like Xi is on a bit of a tear

lately since they acquired Cursor.

They've been moving so much faster. We

went from a drought where they just kind

of didn't put out models that mattered

or really at all for months at a time to

getting a bunch back to back. We just

had Croc 45 not long ago and it really

impressed me. It's not the model I

default to for my everyday work, but

it's the first model that's good enough

from a lab that isn't anthropic or open

AI that I could see myself actually

daily driving it. And now Grock 46 is

here and they've went even further with

it. With everything I've seen and all

the playing I've been doing so far, it

seems incredibly promising. It's fast,

it's cheap, it's reliable, and it's good

at doing long running tasks with lots of

sub agents and not losing track of what

it's supposed to be getting done. This

is important because as the way we build

with agents changes, the ability for

agents to go off for a long time and

solve hard problems and come back with

working results is more important than

ever. Sadly, that doesn't mean this

model's perfect, though. There are rough

edges as there are with everything and

I've already encountered a handful of

those with my own testing. There's also

some big bright sides to this as well

that I've been experiencing the more

I've been using the official Grock Build

CLI which is awesome by the way. I

actually really like the CLI. There's

layers to this one. There are some

really crazy benchmarks which uh spoiler

Gro 46 is now neck andneck with GPT56

Soul according to artificial analysis.

We need to see if this holds up because

if it's actually getting that close at a

fifth the price, things are changing

quickly. While Intelligence seems to be

getting cheaper, my payroll isn't. So, I

hope you pardon me for a quick break for

today's sponsor. I have a real quick

question for you. If you're building an

app and you want to add video to it, how

are you going to do that? Whether it's a

video on the homepage that you want to

use to market your site or userfacing

uploads where they can upload whatever.

How do you know that these videos are

being served correctly, that they're

being processed properly, that they

don't have inappropriate content? And

what happens when you want to do things

like generate captions or get more info

about the video? Well, I hope you would

stumble on today's sponsor, MX, before

you get too far, because they solve all

of those problems and more. Whether

you're just adding one video to a small

homepage on a side project, or you're

trying to build a service that competes

with YouTube, there's a reason everyone

picks MX. Whether it's Fox, Band Camp,

or Robin Hood, or even companies like

Cursor or Dropbox, everyone leans on

these guys for a reason. It's cuz they

get video. I've built a lot of video

services, and if I learned anything in

that time, it's that processing and

managing user generated content is just

a huge rabbit hole you want to avoid to

the best of your ability. And that's why

I'm so thankful for the new MX Robots

product where you can do all of the

automation you would ever need to

trivially. You can set up Muk to answer

questions about videos as they're

uploaded using AI, which is super

powerful by itself. But when you combine

that with the captions and the

moderation, as well as a summary

feature, there is so much stuff you can

do without having to build all of the

details yourself. And once you're

processing that video, it gets really

expensive really fast. But when you use

a service like MX, you know you're

getting the best possible deal. I could

tell you all about how great the code is

and how easy it is to integrate, but

honestly, you should ask your agent. it

already knows about MX because these

guys have been the default for a long

long time. There's a reason I've been

building a MX for eight years and you

can figure out why at sidv.link/mucks.

Let's start from the official

announcement and then go into the real

world use cases, the benchmarks and my

own experience building with it.

Introducing Gro 46. Gro 46 builds on Gro

4.5 with a particular focus on

longrunning agents and more ambitious

interactive and visual work. translated

to actual English quickly. Grock 4 6

isn't a new pre-training. It is a new

post-training on Grock 45 because part

of acquiring cursor is getting all of

cursor's crazy RL and post-training

stuff. And now they have all of this

post- training and RL stuff. They're

able to improve the model after the

pre-training is done. And this is the

technique that makes these longunning

tasks and agentic work stuff much more

reliable. That's usually done in post-

training, not pre-training. As they

mentioned before, 46 is building on 45

with a particular focus on longrunning

agents and more ambitious interactive

and visual work. It stays with complex

tasks across many steps. Whether it's

researching topics, analyzing

information, working across code bases,

or turning ideas into polished apps or

work artifacts. As I mentioned before on

the artificial analysis intelligence

index, it is neck andneck with 56 soul

and right behind fable 5 and opus 5. I

am obligated to say that this shows that

these numbers aren't the best way to

measure how smart or useful a model

actually is because for my experience,

Opus 5 is significantly worse to use

than Fable and Saul. It looked and felt

really good day one, but the more I

started merging the code it wrote, the

more problems I ran into, the more

cleaning up after the Opus sloppus as I

now call it. Yeah, Opus 5 seemed like it

was good and by every measure seemed to

be solid and the more I use it, the more

I hate it and I'm just on Fable all the

time. So again, this bench isn't the

most trustworthy thing, but there are

others in here that are good, like deep

sui, where it is just behind soul and

fable and meaningfully ahead of Grock

45. Like this is a huge bump for a

post-training improvement to go from a

54% to a 66 is huge. Cursor bench saw a

smaller jump, but it did jump Grock 46

past 56 soul, but remember they

accidentally trained some of Cursor

Bench data into the models. I think they

might have cleaned it up with cursor

bench 32. Not sure, but you get the

idea. And then with Frontier Code, they

saw a meaningful jump as well from 56.6

to 61.3, putting it smack dab in the

middle between Soul and Fable. It's

available now in cursor and Grock build.

They've offered 2x usage inside of your

Grock build and cursor subs for the

first week, so you can start trying it

immediately as I have been doing. I am

just on my subscription on Twitter right

now because I already have the like blue

check on X because they pay me for it.

So, I'm on the the pro tier, the one

that kills ads as well. X premium

pricing. Let me see what the costs are

for the different tiers. Yeah, I have

the $40 tier because I don't like ads

and it pays for itself because I'm paid

to use Twitter, as stupid as that is.

So, I've just been using Gro 46 through

the included data I get with that

subscription. And I've used it to

generate a handful of games and also do

some real work in T3 code. Specifically

trying to get things to parody with both

cursor and gro in T3 code because we do

have the Grock bindings built in. Shout

out to the Grock build team for working

with us on that. Really proud that we

got that in as quick as we did. So I was

working on tidying it up using Grock and

so far pretty solid. Show you guys

everything I did with it after we get

through the official information. Grock

46 underwent a longer supplemental

training run than 45 did with curated

model generated data for reasoning and

advanced technical concepts, highquality

engineering data, and an improved

optimizer and training recipe produce a

stronger foundation for the SFT and RL

stages that followed. When they used Gro

45 to regenerate the SFT trajectories

across reasoning efforts, agent

harnesses in domains such as STEM,

software engineering, and knowledge work

as well as filtering out problematic

traces with modelbased checks. The

resulting SFT checkpoint shows strong

performance and improved behavior. 46 is

trained on a wide range of agentic RL

tasks including knowledge work, general

coding, and domain specific environments

for kernel optimization, webdev,

computerated design, and more. I'll show

you guys some Grock 46 designs, don't

worry. They tested Grock 46 on projects

designed to stretch its range and

ability to sustain work over many steps.

The model's especially strong at turning

a broad product idea into working first

versions. It can research unfamiliar

domains, structure the app, implement

the core interactions, and continue

refining the result through several

rounds of feedback. They've also seen it

doing more self tests and verifications

on longer trajectory runs with the model

checking its own work before moving on.

Good. That's been an issue I had with

grock models is they would just write

the whole thing and it would work

sometimes and then fail other times.

Sadly, that was not really my experience

with the game gen stuff I was doing,

which I will show you all momentarily.

They added more safeguards due to new

safety capabilities and potential to

hack and whatnot. Safeguard evaluation

work reflects 46 expanded capabilities

with our widest ever suite of

pre-eployment testing for capabilities

and safeguard calibration as well as

extensive post- deployment and

third-party testing. Let's see how this

goes. Do a thorough security audit of

this project. Are we ready to launch?

What should we fix first? We'll see how

it does with a thorough security audit

in a real codebase. I have it pointed at

my cloud that I'm still hopefully

getting out soon. Lake bed. They show a

chunk of eval here which we'll look at

while I wait for that to run.

Intelligence inex we already covered.

GDP val I don't care about. Cursor bench

it's still behind fable but it's now

ahead of 56 soul which is crazy. Deep

suite it's getting up there. It's neck

andneck with soul and fable. Actually

it's a little bit more behind there but

still huge improvement for 45. It got

bestin-class in AA briefcase and Harvey

Lab vals, which are interesting. Also,

the best in GDP val, but again, like I

don't care. It's GDP val. SpaceXI's Gro

4.6 scores a 61 on the artificial

analysis intelligence index, joining the

frontier in line with 56 soul with

standout agentic performance at lower

costs. 46 gains five points over 45 in

the intelligence index just over one

month after its release. That's a

five-point improvement in a few months

and 23 points compared to 43, which is

really not that long ago. The pace of

releases from these guys has been nuts

lately. And it looks like that pace will

maintain because Elon's already tweeting

saying that 4.7 is significantly better

than 4.6 and it should be ready in 3 to

4 weeks. The initial training is

complete and they're adding a massive

amount of SpaceX company data in

supplementary training and they're

expecting it to be quote something

special. Very interesting. This is the

jump where they are now in the frontier

range. comparable to the other frontier

models according to artificial analysis.

Much stronger agentic performance

especially with things like GDP val

frontier level intelligence at lower

costs because again it's way cheaper.

It's $2 per mill in and $6 per mill out

which is 60% below Opus 5's price and

even more than 56 souls price costs 84

cents per task which is similar to Kimmy

K3 with slightly higher intelligence

which gives it a really good place on

the Pareto Frontier. The cost versus how

smart it is. Cost per task is right

there with Kimmy K3. Slightly more

expensive than Gemini 36 Flash and

Terra. Slightly less expensive than 56

Soul. Comically cheaper than Opus 5 and

Fable 5 for realworld use. That is $3.14

for Fable and 84 cents for Gro 46. This

is more than double the price that Grock

45 was though, which is the important

detail they seem to be hiding. I'm

guessing this price gap is a token

difference between 46 and 45, which we

can confirm here. Yep. I was so pumped

that Grock 45 was as efficient as it

was. Seeing them lose that with 46 is a

little sad. They've increased the number

of tokens per run by over 30% here.

Previously, they were one of the few

major providers that had a model that

was more token efficient than 56 Soul.

Now, they're not. Now they are still

relatively efficient, like comparable or

better than Fable efficiency-wise, but

it's no longer that magic efficient

small fast cheap model that I wanted it

to be. This is something I've actually

felt in my own usage because I noticed

that the Gro 45 test when I did them ran

almost immediately, like creepily fast.

46 is back to the usual send off the

prompt and then go do something else

that I'm used to from Frontier. They

talk about their AA briefcase bench

where it is now Fable 5 tier. Context

window is the same at 500k tokens. The

price is the same as well. They did

increase the price of cash reads.

Previously it was only 3 cents per

million tokens red. Now it's 5 cents per

million tokens red for the cash. That

might also be affecting price here. Some

of these jumps are nuts. Like I know I

don't like GDP Val, but this is one of

the biggest jumps I've ever seen in that

benchmark. Like that's crazy.

It's clearly much better at these long

running things, but it also thinks a lot

more, too. And again, as I said, it is

now much more expensive, but it's also

slightly smarter. It's got a really good

score here in the cost versus

intelligence, but this does yank them

out of this golden area of like the

green corner where it is the cheapest

and the smartest and forces it out over

to be on the right side of the median

for cost on the log scale, which is sad.

They're clearly trying to rush their way

to the frontier. So now it's time to see

how it does with UI. I have other things

I've been working on with it in the

background, too. But I am very curious

how its design work is because it's a

different model, and it is nice to see

the different ways different models

handle design. As I mentioned in my Muse

Spark video, I was actually surprised at

how different the Muse models felt for

design work than the usual anthropic and

OpenAI slop. I've experienced less of

that with Grock models where they feel

more like a dumbed down version

design-wise. So, let's see what they

cooked. I'll start with none of the

skills on and just go through these

Grock 46 outputs. Shout out to Dra for

making the site. By the way, the

witchai.dev is super handy for this type

of video. Here's the first design that

it made. I don't like the noise pattern,

and I really don't like the way that the

text is so sharp with the blurryish

background. It just doesn't feel

cohesive. This feels like old era AI

Slavic. This is GPT 5.0 is how this

feels to me. The purple in particular is

This one has a nice little mock app in

the corner, which is fine. The coloring

is okay. Too many cards. Too old school

like Tailwind Templaty. This is the

usual brutalism that we see from a lot

of these. And this is a boring centered

page. Yeah, none of these impress me. I

did happen to notice that when you use

the design skill from Claude, it can and

do better. Some of them are sinful and

disgusting like whatever the this

is. Some of them have okay ideas on them

like this with the floating card things

when you hover. Yeah, could be tidied

up. This is sinful. This is sinful. Not

digging this. And just for reference,

here is Fable doing similar designs.

Much much better, like comically. So, I

hate that the terminal ones, but other

than that, or even like Opus does a much

better job here with these, or even 56

Soul, as cringe as it often is, is

meaningfully better at this type of

thing. Like, this is a much nicer

version of this style of page. So, not

great at design at all. I will show the

real work I was doing with it earlier,

but I first want to play with these fish

slop ports because they're fun and I'm

curious how it did. Those who aren't

familiar, I made a game at the end of

last year with Opus called Fish Slop

with Opus 45. Never got very far with

it. It was meant to be an insane

aquarium clone. So, I like throwing

models at the old codebase and say,

"Rebuild this. You can reuse assets or

whatever, but from scratch, make a new

version of this game using that codebase

as a reference." And it's a fun way to

see how well it like understands a lot

of end toend

work in a complex thing like the

relations between systems in a game. I'm

already noticing that like the controls

are uh bad. The sizing of elements is

all wrong. Like these fish pellets are

too big and the fish are too small. The

fact that the thing you had highlighted

on the bottom here stays highlighted

when you move off it is really bad.

Yeah, the movement just feels so not

great. The pace of the game seems wrong,

too, where things don't like grow fast

enough and you don't get to the next

stage quick enough. Yeah, this just

doesn't feel great. This is like Kimmy

K3 did a meaningfully better job with

this than Gro 46 seems to be. But this

is the easy version. The hard version is

3D. This is what I got when I first

opened the 3D version of the game. A

black screen. This is the first new

model I have pointed at the task of a

make the game 3D and had it just

outright fail. All the others might have

had bugs and issues with like the

movement or the mechanics or the models

they created in the 3D space. All of

them opened with a 3D environment. Even

like GBT4 was able to get that far. This

is the first one that just outright

failed to do the 3D port. I did tell the

model that it failed. I even gave it a

picture which showed me how nice the

rendering of pictures and things is

inside of the Gro CLI, which like the

Grock build CLI is actually genuinely

really nice. Well, I told it to fix it

with the screenshot. It appears that it

did. So, let's dive in and see. Oh god,

this is so cringe. They got the

directions wrong. So, up and down is

right, but left and right are inverted.

I don't know how you get right and left

inverted, but they did. The placement of

everything at the ground is entirely

wrong. Like, comically so. God, this is

very bad and broken. [clears throat]

The models for the fish are This

is the worst 3D pass I've seen on this

in a long time. Actually, this is like

last year I would have expected quality

like this. Just for reference, here's

the version that Muse12 made for way

cheaper. It got some directional issues

like up and down tilt it, but like it

functions. The movement's way better.

The core mechanics work a lot better. If

we want to go to real frontier, like I

don't know, uh, Kimmy, look at how much

further along this is. The modeling of

the things on the ground. The lighting's

a little broken, but like

this is a generational gap. This is an

open weight model, by the way. Like, you

can go download the weights online and

have a thing that is this much better at

3D. And the fish model is so much

better. It's actually the best 3D

modeling I've seen any of the models do

so far. So yeah, there's your

comparison. Grock is not even

unimpressive. It's like last generation.

It's so far ahead here. But then there

is realworld work. And for this I was

quite kind to Gro 45. I found it

surprisingly capable of doing like real

work where it had to touch different

things that were complex and stay on

task for longer running things. Well,

take a look at the security audit it

just did. It found a previous audit that

I did in the git history. So, that's

cool. So, it's already strong. The O

broker, the worker isolation storage

control plane will get us burned. Give

us advice for locking endpoints. Put it

on the public suffix list. I already was

planning on that. like bed chrome on

every capsule page. Finish the admin

trust and safety UI. Stop putting

identity tokens in URLs or a wider

launch. Refuse sandbox off flags in

production. Yeah, did a decent audit

here. Didn't get me any errors or

problems when it did it. There are other

deeper things it didn't find, but that's

acceptable. This is the more interesting

one I wanted to take a look at with

y'all. I asked Grock 46 to take a look

at how we have T3 code implementing

cursor because the current build is

using the outofdate ACP adapter for the

cursor CLI. They want us to move to the

SDK. I believe Julius is work on the new

orchestrator includes that. But I wanted

to see what it would do. So I asked it

to go through and audit things and see

how we would migrate from ACP to the

Cursor SDK. For long lived gooey hosts

that need a real model catalog, resume,

cancel images, and usage. The SDK is the

one that cursor is actually maintaining.

Yep. So why is ACP the wrong host

contract? Then built in fallbacks. Yeah,

these are all real problems that we've

had with the current cursor bindings. So

it was correct there. Official docs

license anywhere to not MIT. That is

annoying, but that's fine.

The SDK doesn't offer guey level approve

or deny. That's annoying, but we auto

run anyways for most things. Blocking

ask questions. Uh the SDK will not allow

that. and reusing agent login. That will

not work. So, we have to implement our

own login, which is annoying. You know

what I will do? I don't feel like

reading gro slop. We'll have 56 soul

share its thoughts momentarily. Plan

approval could not be completed because

the client disconnected. Plan mode

remains active. Okay, so it put itself

in plan mode. That is obnoxious. Did it

put the plan in here anywhere? It

didn't. That is very annoying. Yeah, the

Grock implementation needs a little bit

of work as well. I will put some time in

in the near future. I have to go turn on

the legacy plan mode for this.

While those plans are being audited,

I'll show off a little bit of it

behaving how I wanted it to. Here I

asked it, what gaps exist in T3 Code's

implementation of Grock build compared

to other harnesses. It went through it

made a plan. I don't know where it went

in the UI. There there's some weirdness

in the events that the Grock build like

ACP sends out. So, we have to put more

work into how we clean those events up.

But I asked at the end here, I wanted to

see it differently. So I just said HTML

which triggers my HTML skill and it

responded there. The UI collapsed it

again because their events are broken.

Uh I gave it some feedback on the plan.

Had it update then asked it to build the

whole plan file a PR and babysit which

it did. I can go open it on GitHub and

we can see what things thought here. We

got a bunch of feedback from Macroscope

on the changes. It tore things to shreds

here, but it seems like it followed my

instructions really well. You'll see

here that it used my account to reply to

things, but I have a little call out in

a skill I made for PR comments where I

tell every agent to open its comments

with note which model is responding on

behalf of Theo. This is not a small

change either. This is a thousandline PR

that it made to address a bunch of

different gaps in our coverage for Grock

Build. And I told it after it makes the

PR to babysit it once it was filed. Then

I told it to do one of my favorite

things, which is to tell the agent to

look through my actual history on my

actual computer and find gaps in what

events occurred and what we actually

process. Just told it to make a separate

PR stacked on the one that we currently

have to do all these additional changes.

This is a complex issue because it needs

to know how to like figure out and stack

PRs. It needs to keep track of the gap

between the old PR and the new one. All

the investigatory work it just did in

the context of how it applies with my

history on this machine as well as all

the other skills and things that it

pulled in. It's not easy for models to

deal with all of this like competing

context and stay on track. This is one

of the things again I thought Grock 45

did surprisingly well. It was able to

take multi-step unrelated work and do it

all cohesively and coherently in one

thread. So, we shall see how it handles

this here. I just put together a really

rough like how I would score Grock

compared to Fable and Soul for like

different categories. I think about

things like cost where Fable's way too

expensive. Soul's significantly better.

Probably do a little lower there, but

like reasonably priced. And then Grock

45 way better on cost. Intelligence,

Fable is the best right now. Soul is

surprisingly good, but not quite as

good. Grock is not even this. I would

put a little lower there. Then you have

speed where fable is very slow. Soul is

meaningfully faster simply because it's

so much more efficient. And then Grock

45, especially on the fast mode, flew.

It was super fast and really nice. Then

with thoroughess, Fable, I find, isn't

quite as thorough as it should be. It

misses things here and there, but it's

it's thoughtful, not thorough. Soul is

incredibly thorough. It checks every

single thing. It touches every single

edge, and it writes too much code as a

result. 45 just did not have any of

that. And then with orchestration

capabilities, Fable was the best. Soul

is surprisingly close in Grock 45.

Better than most, but still not quite

there. So, how does this all compare to

our new model Grock 46? Sadly, cost is a

regression. I'd say this is like a

sixish now. Intelligence seems like a

meaningful bump. I haven't seen too much

of it being way smarter, but I can

confidently say it's probably

meaningfully better. We'll give it a 6.5

there. Speed is where I'm seeing one of

the biggest regressions now where I

would put it at like a five and a half

at best right now. Thoroughess, it is

better, but it still misses things. I'll

bump it slightly there. In orchestration

capabilities, I did see it using sub

agents decently well. I'll give it a 6.5

here. Why not? The issue is the only

things I would consider Grock previously

to be a leader in were the speed and the

cost. And we saw regressions in both of

those categories with this release. The

cost went up, not per token, but since

the token efficiency went down, it's now

more expensive. And the speed went down

because it's less token efficient. So,

it's generating more tokens and it takes

longer. These two changes make Grock

much, much less interesting to me. But

the speed at which the intelligence is

growing suggests that Gro 47 will do a

lot more in all of these other

categories to catch up. The thing I

liked Grock 45 for wasn't that it was as

good as Frontier at specific things.

It's that the speed and the cost were

far enough away from Frontier that it

felt uniquely useful in those ways. And

I feel like we are losing that with

Grock 46 a little bit. I think that

summarizes my thoughts on this release.

Is it my favorite model? No. Am I going

to use it a whole lot after this video?

Probably not. But does it have me

excited for Grock 4.7? Absolutely yes.

It makes a lot of sense why Elon's

talking more about 47 than 46 right now.

The future seems very clear and it seems

like a future where Grock catches up

very fast and I'm honestly pretty

excited for that. We need more

competition. We need more good models

and we need more people fighting to make

them cheaper. Let me know how y'all

feel. Is this an exciting release for

you or are you going to just ignore it?

Let me know in the comments. And until

next time, peace nerds.