Code Davinci 002 vs Grok 3 Mini
Code Davinci 002 (2021) and Grok 3 Mini (2025) compare a coding-specialized model against a standalone API model. Code Davinci 002 ships a not-yet-sourced context window, while Grok 3 Mini ships a 131k-token context window. This page treats the result as workflow and deployment fit, not a universal model winner.
Treat this as a product-type comparison: Code Davinci 002 is coding-specialized model, while Grok 3 Mini is standalone API model. Choose based on workflow fit before reading any benchmark or price row as decisive.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Code Davinci 002 | Grok 3 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| Product type | Coding-specialized model | Standalone API model |
| Best for | custom coding agents and code generation | multimodal apps and provider-routed production |
| Decision fit | Coding | RAG, Long context, and Vision |
| Context window | — | 131k |
| Cheapest output | - | $1.27/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 0 tracked | 2 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Local decision data tags Code Davinci 002 for Coding.
- Grok 3 Mini has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Grok 3 Mini has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Grok 3 Mini uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Grok 3 Mini for RAG, Long context, and Vision.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Code Davinci 002
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Grok 3 Mini
$518
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Microsoft Foundry
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Code Davinci 002 and Grok 3 Mini; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Grok 3 Mini adds Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs in local capability data.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Grok 3 Mini and Code Davinci 002; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs before moving production traffic.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2021-08-16 | 2025-02-17 |
| Context window | — | 131k |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | decoder only | - |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Openness | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | Commercial use with conditions | Commercial use with conditions |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | 2024-11 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Code Davinci 002 | Grok 3 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | $0.25/1M tokens |
| Output price | - | $1.27/1M tokens |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Capability | Code Davinci 002 | Grok 3 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | No | No |
| Tool use | No | No |
| Structured outputs | No | Yes |
| Code execution | No | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Grok 3 Mini, multimodal input: Grok 3 Mini, and structured outputs: Grok 3 Mini. Both models share the core language-model surface, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
Pricing coverage is uneven: Code Davinci 002 has no token price sourced yet and Grok 3 Mini has $0.25/1M input tokens. Provider availability is 0 tracked routes versus 2. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Code Davinci 002 when coding workflow support are central to the workload. Choose Grok 3 Mini when vision-heavy evaluation and broader provider choice are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.
FAQ
Is Code Davinci 002 or Grok 3 Mini open source?
Code Davinci 002 is listed under Proprietary. Grok 3 Mini is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Code Davinci 002 or Grok 3 Mini?
Grok 3 Mini has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for multimodal input, Code Davinci 002 or Grok 3 Mini?
Grok 3 Mini has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for structured outputs, Code Davinci 002 or Grok 3 Mini?
Grok 3 Mini has the clearer documented structured outputs signal in this comparison. If structured outputs is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Code Davinci 002 and Grok 3 Mini?
Code Davinci 002 is available on the tracked providers still being sourced. Grok 3 Mini is available on OpenRouter and Microsoft Foundry. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
When should I pick Code Davinci 002 over Grok 3 Mini?
Treat this as a product-type comparison: Code Davinci 002 is coding-specialized model, while Grok 3 Mini is standalone API model. Choose based on workflow fit before reading any benchmark or price row as decisive. If your workload also depends on coding workflow support, start with Code Davinci 002; if it depends on vision-heavy evaluation, run the same evaluation with Grok 3 Mini.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-04. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.