Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Grok 4.5 for multi-step research

The verdict

Grok 4.5 wins, 8578

Same 12 multi-step research tasks, marked blind by three rival labs. Grok 4.5 took 5 tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash took 0, 7 tied. Tested 18 Aug 2026.

Where they differed most

The task — The evidence table, as JSON

Three extracts on whether a town's new 20mph zone reduced injuries. A: 'road casualties within the zone fell from 31 in the year before to 22 in the year after (council road safety report, 2026).' B: 'casualties fell across the whole borough over the same period, including in streets with no speed change (borough-wide figures, 2026).' C: 'average speeds inside the zone fell by 2.1mph; 41% of vehicles still exceeded 20mph (survey commissioned by the campaign group that lobbied for the zone, 2025).' Reply with ONLY valid JSON — no prose before or after. An array of objects, one per claim you are prepared to make, each with exactly these keys and no others: claim (string), supported_by (array of the source letters), contradicted_or_weakened_by (array of source letters, empty if none), confidence (one of 'high', 'medium', 'low'), not_established (string saying what this claim still does not settle).

[
  {
    "claim": "Road casualties within the new 20mph zone decreased in the year after its introduction.",
    "supported_by": ["A"],
    "contradicted_or_weakened_by": [],
    "confidence": "high",
    "not_established": "Whether this local decrease was caused by the 20mph zone itself or was part of a broader, external trend."
  },
  {
    "claim": "The new 20mph zone was the primary driver behind the reduction in local road casualties.",
    "supported_by": ["A"],
    "contradicted_or_weakened_by": ["B", "C"],
    "confidence": "low",…
[
  {
    "claim": "Road casualties inside the 20mph zone were lower in the year after introduction than in the year before.",
    "supported_by": ["A"],
    "contradicted_or_weakened_by": ["B"],
    "confidence": "high",
    "not_established": "Whether the fall was caused by the 20mph zone rather than wider trends, regression to the mean, or other concurrent factors."
  },
  {
    "claim": "Casualty reductions occurred borough-wide over the same period, including on streets with no speed-limit change.",
    "supported_by": ["B"],
    "contradi…

Task by task

TaskGemini 3.5 FlashGrok 4.5
Four numbers, one high street88
The trial that both worked and didn't88
Break the brief into answerable steps89
Corroboration that isn't88
The disagreement is definitional67
A forecast is not an outcome88
The evidence table, as JSON710
Funded, and still the best data78
Write only the limits section99
Not answerable from what you have99
The statistic and the doorstep88
Refuse the manufactured briefing810

Full receipts: Gemini 3.5 Flash, Grok 4.5 · judges claude-sonnet-5, gpt-5.6-terra, grok-4.5

Questions people ask

Which is better for multi-step research: Gemini 3.5 Flash or Grok 4.5?

Grok 4.5 — it scored 85/100 against 78/100 on our 12-task multi-step research suite, winning 5 tasks to 0 with 7 tied. Every answer was marked blind by three judges from three rival AI labs.

How was this tested?

Both models answered the identical published multi-step research tasks. Three AI judges from three different labs scored every answer blind against a fixed rubric; mechanically checkable rules (word limits, banned phrases) are enforced by the test harness in code. The raw outputs and judge verdicts are downloadable.

More multi-step research head-to-heads: Claude Sonnet 5 vs Grok 4.5 · Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash · GPT-5.5 vs Grok 4.5 · Gemini 3.5 Flash vs GPT-5.5 · GPT-5.6 Sol vs Grok 4.5 · Gemini 3.5 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol

Full ranking: Best AI for multi-step research · model pages: Gemini 3.5 Flash, Grok 4.5