Head-to-head comparison

GPT Image 1.5 vs. Grok Imagine Image Quality

Compare shared capability tests, arena scores with documented retrieval dates, task-specific image pricing, and verified specifications. Research benchmarks, preference arenas, and our n = 1 samples remain separate.

shared result series: 14
shared sample prompts: 4
latest arena retrieval: 2026-08-26

First image modelSecond image model

Specifications and cost

General specifications and task-specific pricing

A model can have one price for generating new images and another for editing. Prices therefore remain tied to the corresponding arena configuration.

Specifications and pricing for GPT Image 1.5 and Grok Imagine Image Quality
Attribute	GPT Image 1.5	Grok Imagine Image Quality
Provider	OpenAI	xAI
Released	December 2025	April 2026
Access	API, Web app	API, Web app
Lifecycle	Marked as deprecated by OpenAI Status source	No separate lifecycle notice
Weights	Proprietary	Proprietary
Parameters	Not published	Not published
Maximum output	1,536 × 1,024 pixels	2K
Arena configuration	High	Quality
Text-to-image price	$133 per 1,000 images	$50 per 1,000 images
Editing price	$133 per 1,000 images	$50 per 1,000 images
Technical source	Model sourceVerified 2026-08-15	Model sourceVerified 2026-08-15

GPT Image 1.5Grok Imagine Image Quality

Text to Image ArenaUSD per 1,000 images at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels

GPT Image 1.5$133

Grok Imagine Image Quality$50

Image Editing ArenaUSD per 1,000 images at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels

GPT Image 1.5$133

Grok Imagine Image Quality$50

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Prompt adherence and specialist tests

Shared capability benchmarks

Every matchup includes the same four Gradually sample tasks. For each task, one archived first output from every model is ranked in three differently ordered, model-blind passes. The published 0-100 value normalizes the mean rank. It must still be read as an n = 1 sample per model. No exact shared result from the integrated research benchmarks is available for this pair.

GPT Image 1.5Grok Imagine Image Quality

Gradually sample test: Typography and layoutMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each

GPT Image 1.533.3 / 100

Grok Imagine Image Quality65.4 / 100

Gradually sample test: Product photographyMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each

GPT Image 1.537 / 100

Grok Imagine Image Quality4.9 / 100

Gradually sample test: Character and detailMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each

GPT Image 1.585.2 / 100

Grok Imagine Image Quality59.3 / 100

Gradually sample test: InfographicMean of three blind ranks across all 28 first outputs, n = 1 each

GPT Image 1.549.4 / 100

Grok Imagine Image Quality21 / 100

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Capability benchmark scores for GPT Image 1.5 and Grok Imagine Image Quality
Benchmark	GPT Image 1.5	Grok Imagine Image Quality
Gradually sample test: Typography and layout	33.3 / 100 Mean rank: 19 (20 / 18 / 19) Five rubric scores Headline: 1.67 / 2 Subline: 1.67 / 2 Text control: 1.67 / 2 Visual brief: 1.33 / 2 Layout: 1 / 2	Higher blind-rank score65.4 / 100 Mean rank: 10.33 (7 / 9 / 15) Five rubric scores Headline: 1.67 / 2 Subline: 1.67 / 2 Text control: 1.67 / 2 Visual brief: 1.33 / 2 Layout: 1 / 2
Gradually sample test: Product photography	Higher blind-rank score37 / 100 Mean rank: 18 (18 / 16 / 20) Five rubric scores Subject: 1.33 / 2 Time: 1 / 2 Watch details: 1.33 / 2 Photography: 1.33 / 2 Exclusions: 1.33 / 2	4.9 / 100 Mean rank: 26.67 (27 / 25 / 28) Five rubric scores Subject: 1 / 2 Time: 0.67 / 2 Watch details: 1 / 2 Photography: 1.33 / 2 Exclusions: 1 / 2
Gradually sample test: Character and detail	Higher blind-rank score85.2 / 100 Mean rank: 5 (5 / 8 / 2) Five rubric scores Scene: 1.33 / 2 Wardrobe: 1.33 / 2 Anatomy: 1 / 2 Props: 1.33 / 2 Environment: 1.33 / 2	59.3 / 100 Mean rank: 12 (18 / 10 / 8) Five rubric scores Scene: 1.33 / 2 Wardrobe: 1.33 / 2 Anatomy: 1.33 / 2 Props: 1.33 / 2 Environment: 1 / 2
Gradually sample test: Infographic	Higher blind-rank score49.4 / 100 Mean rank: 14.67 (13 / 15 / 16) Five rubric scores Title: 1.67 / 2 Sequence: 1.67 / 2 Labels: 1 / 2 Diagram: 1.67 / 2 Clarity: 1 / 2	21 / 100 Mean rank: 22.33 (23 / 22 / 22) Five rubric scores Title: 1.67 / 2 Sequence: 1.67 / 2 Labels: 0.67 / 2 Diagram: 1.67 / 2 Clarity: 0.33 / 2
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Independent preference tests

Shared arena benchmarks

Artificial Analysis and Arena derive scores from blind comparisons. Raters see outputs for the same prompt and choose the image they prefer. Separate series cover text rendering, photorealism, portraits, art, commercial design, and image editing. Confidence intervals indicate how certain a measured lead is.

10 shared result series

GPT Image 1.5Grok Imagine Image Quality

Text to Image ArenaBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,310 Elo

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,235 Elo

Image Editing ArenaBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,251 Elo

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,225 Elo

LMArena Text to Image: 3D modelingBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,215.437

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,207.187

LMArena Text to Image: ArtBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,223.911

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,210.217

LMArena Text to Image: CartoonBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,243.08

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,227.232

LMArena Text to Image: Commercial designBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,240.908

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,224.523

LMArena Text to Image: OverallBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,238.658

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,228.14

LMArena Text to Image: PhotorealismBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,248.785

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,242.93

LMArena Text to Image: PortraitsBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,261.416

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,271.787

LMArena Text to Image: Text renderingBlind preference from the same prompt, higher is better

GPT Image 1.51,254.593

Grok Imagine Image Quality1,249.616

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Arena benchmark scores for GPT Image 1.5 and Grok Imagine Image Quality
Benchmark	GPT Image 1.5	Grok Imagine Image Quality	Source
Text to Image Arena	Higher score1,310 Elo Rank 5, 95% confidence interval: ±9, 13,674 ratings	1,235 Elo Rank 14, 95% confidence interval: ±8, 15,970 ratings	Artificial AnalysisRetrieved 2026-08-26
Image Editing Arena	Higher score1,251 Elo Rank 6, 95% confidence interval: ±7, 11,694 ratings	1,225 Elo Rank 12, 95% confidence interval: ±8, 10,235 ratings	Artificial AnalysisRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: 3D modeling	No clear lead1,215.437 Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±6.83, 14,763 ratings	1,207.187 Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±9.22, 4,538 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Art	No clear lead1,223.911 Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±6.08, 19,937 ratings	1,210.217 Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±7.93, 6,779 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Cartoon	Higher score1,243.08 Rank 10, 95% confidence interval: ±4.87, 55,661 ratings	1,227.232 Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±6.12, 18,027 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Commercial design	Higher score1,240.908 Rank 10, 95% confidence interval: ±4.72, 55,926 ratings	1,224.523 Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±6, 18,674 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Overall	Higher score1,238.658 Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±3.36, 142,427 ratings	1,228.14 Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±4.23, 48,786 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Photorealism	No clear lead1,248.785 Rank 11, 95% confidence interval: ±4.83, 57,631 ratings	1,242.93 Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±6.04, 20,413 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Portraits	1,261.416 Rank 9, 95% confidence interval: ±5.95, 28,153 ratings	No clear lead1,271.787 Rank 6, 95% confidence interval: ±7.36, 10,165 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
LMArena Text to Image: Text rendering	No clear lead1,254.593 Rank 10, 95% confidence interval: ±4.98, 51,503 ratings	1,249.616 Rank 13, 95% confidence interval: ±6.31, 16,688 ratings	LMArenaRetrieved 2026-08-26
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Visual comparison

Sample images

Our images complement preference data, but do not replace it. The prompt, request count, and selection rule match. Provider resolution, quality tier, randomness, and prompt processing remain visible limitations, so this is not a fully controlled laboratory test.

Largely standardized comparison protocol. Both models receive the same archived prompt, exactly one request, and the first result counts. Files are normalized to 1,024 × 1,024 pixels without cropping. Provider resolution, randomness, quality tier, and prompt processing can still differ. These images are a practical visual test, not a reconstruction of the arena configuration.

Character and detail

Anatomy, clothing, and spatial consistency

Prompt and settings

Create a square cinematic full-body portrait of a fictional bicycle courier waiting under a transparent umbrella at a rainy tram stop in Hamburg at blue hour. She wears a mustard raincoat, navy trousers, red sneakers, a silver helmet, and carries a teal messenger bag. Keep both hands visible, render the bicycle correctly, use realistic wet-street reflections, and include no readable brand names.

GPT Image 1.5. Provider Together, 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, provider default steps, model ID openai/gpt-image-1.5, generated Aug 14, 2026, 12:17 PM. Source
Grok Imagine Image Quality. Provider OpenRouter, aspect ratio 1:1, resolution 1K, n=1, seed=provider random, actual cost $0.050000, model ID x-ai/grok-imagine-image-quality, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:34 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: 985a75b38642a9f0e5e0c0e0c67f1b7f67780d42bd2168fa24e9a7a7a94b0da6

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 0dff52ccd39400ac66ac8870c9ea937512ff1474688e70118688f420c38c2296

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: 5199631ac6ff07633dd2fb6ab61c918c26e1e02f37e6131828072233ac04527d

Grok Imagine Image Quality, image SHA 256: b6cccae7af9a70af45a46b9e3264fa6971101e04979f7a0539e889ba6521250a

Grok Imagine Image Quality, request SHA 256: 5eb607f5dab8f6ef684eb315d3cae08e7d962bb6df6b77aaf88a64e0dc5665eb

Infographic

Numbers, labels, and visual organization

Prompt and settings

Create a square German infographic titled SO FUNKTIONIERT PHOTOSYNTHESE. Show exactly four numbered steps in this order: 1 LICHT, 2 WASSER, 3 CO₂, 4 ZUCKER + SAUERSTOFF. Use a clean editorial science style with one plant cross-section, simple arrows, high contrast, legible labels, and no other text.

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: ed65cb4e6a51e2336f8b149ad4cbb16e020f07d527ad94362e719d2dcf91d94f

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 1c9ff59c32621c8b48b002dacb0ae66487262280c7c0a5b3d6456c81b248ebe9

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: 7f1efc9531f1e6bed7d61a11c637add9fd892001aea2bb2781f8d89c79a2eb03

Grok Imagine Image Quality, image SHA 256: 03fbeae7859be72584048dfc23fba0651220ab44c707da66c386b77d90cc86f7

Grok Imagine Image Quality, request SHA 256: f576589c9e48139779b3876e26e751fa6282caa2363332dff24d10409696b3d7

Product photography

Materials, reflections, and fine details

Prompt and settings

Create a square premium product photograph of a brushed titanium wristwatch standing upright on dark green marble. The watch has a cream dial, thin black hands set to 10:10, twelve distinct hour markers, a realistic crown, and a dark brown leather strap. Soft window light from the left, controlled reflections, shallow depth of field, no text, no logo, no extra objects.

GPT Image 1.5. Provider Together, 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, provider default steps, model ID openai/gpt-image-1.5, generated Aug 14, 2026, 12:16 PM. Source
Grok Imagine Image Quality. Provider OpenRouter, aspect ratio 1:1, resolution 1K, n=1, seed=provider random, actual cost $0.050000, model ID x-ai/grok-imagine-image-quality, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:34 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: c67fd71e91304458a2feef5c91efa8677260fab0c0099a29a2c52cb579f5b2f3

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 67cfa2f324447027ceb5f82e9446d40a1395b46ce425890a74606b4d97731cf6

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: c850843a298631a4076c5d2686de8e9d7223534f2b8ca53505f437862718bef9

Grok Imagine Image Quality, image SHA 256: 0ea1e48f20bf61ff10414398b5248b0496c9040b3868c915580efd11d0dbaf11

Grok Imagine Image Quality, request SHA 256: 9320d8ca97077311b8f57251645ad46aa9fe084e77bbdfb99f5543d8db898855

Typography and layout

Legible text, hierarchy, and composition

Prompt and settings

Create a square editorial poster for an imaginary night train called MONDFALTER. Show the exact German headline MONDFALTER and the exact subline BERLIN NACH LISSABON. Use a restrained midnight-blue and warm-cream palette, one stylized moth, strong Swiss-grid typography, generous negative space, and no additional words or logos.

GPT Image 1.5. Provider Together, 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, provider default steps, model ID openai/gpt-image-1.5, generated Aug 14, 2026, 1:59 PM. Source
Grok Imagine Image Quality. Provider OpenRouter, aspect ratio 1:1, resolution 1K, n=1, seed=provider random, actual cost $0.050000, model ID x-ai/grok-imagine-image-quality, generated Aug 14, 2026, 2:05 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1, selection rule: first result.

Prompt SHA 256: 2e012c3d14ee5dd02203a94f394ca80a5038cdebd6032b25a8b8a221f2255419

GPT Image 1.5, image SHA 256: 6a4cec86850fd371b65274198e2bf630b3cf36a096f9fb953d4bfe17c3222ebe

GPT Image 1.5, request SHA 256: 9c3a396aecfcaae3f8a25edbe5c8c44d0d33199d7ba29efda864d2b0221c3250

Grok Imagine Image Quality, image SHA 256: 84d88fb03bdbba672fc91268f4c120b17a19e4c9d637425aeca8ed44b2397d9f

Grok Imagine Image Quality, request SHA 256: 46fe1175225b4b1ddc97b59b3735541cd5b214e0226e1ef1f2c3cf02beaf8485

How to read this comparison

An Elo score is not a verdict on creativity

A higher arena score means this specific configuration was preferred more often in blind comparisons.

Typography, character consistency, local execution, licensing, and price may matter more to your workload than overall visual appeal.

Prices cover 1,000 images at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels using settings documented by Artificial Analysis. Subscriptions and special rates are excluded.

More matchups

Compare GPT Image 1.5 and Grok Imagine Image Quality with other important image models using the same benchmark and sample methodology.

View the complete image model comparison

GPT Image 1.5 vs. Grok Imagine Image Quality

Change image model selection

General specifications and task-specific pricing

Shared capability benchmarks

Shared arena benchmarks

Sample images

Character and detail

Infographic

Product photography

Typography and layout

An Elo score is not a verdict on creativity

Related image model comparisons