Composer 2 vs Grok Build 0.1
Composer 2 (2026) and Grok Build 0.1 (2026) are agentic coding models from Cursor (Anysphere) and xAI. Composer 2 ships a 200K-token context window, while Grok Build 0.1 ships a 256K-token context window. On pricing, Composer 2 costs $0.5/1M input tokens versus $1/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
Composer 2 is ~100% cheaper at $0.5/1M; pay for Grok Build 0.1 only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Composer 2 | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 200K | 256K |
| Cheapest output | $2.5/1M tokens | $2/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 1 tracked | 1 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Composer 2 uniquely exposes Code execution in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Composer 2 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Grok Build 0.1 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Grok Build 0.1 has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $2/1M tokens.
- Grok Build 0.1 uniquely exposes Reasoning and Structured outputs in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Grok Build 0.1 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.
Composer 2
$1,025
Cheapest tracked route: Cursor
Grok Build 0.1
$1,300
Cheapest tracked route: xAI Console
Estimated monthly gap: $275. Batch, cache, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Composer 2 and Grok Build 0.1; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Grok Build 0.1 is $0.5/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Code execution before moving production traffic.
- Grok Build 0.1 adds Reasoning and Structured outputs in local capability data.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Grok Build 0.1 and Composer 2; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Composer 2 is $0.5/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Check replacement coverage for Reasoning and Structured outputs before moving production traffic.
- Composer 2 adds Code execution in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-03-19 | 2026-05-14 |
| Context window | 200K | 256K |
| Parameters | — | — |
| Architecture | - | - |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Composer 2 | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.5/1M tokens | $1/1M tokens |
| Output price | $2.5/1M tokens | $2/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Composer 2 | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | No |
| Multimodal | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | No | Yes |
| Code execution | Yes | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on reasoning mode: Grok Build 0.1, structured outputs: Grok Build 0.1, and code execution: Composer 2. Both models share function calling and tool use, 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.
For cost, Composer 2 lists $0.5/1M input and $2.5/1M output tokens, while Grok Build 0.1 lists $1/1M input and $2/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Composer 2 lower by about $0.2 per million blended tokens. Availability is 1 providers versus 1, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Composer 2 when coding workflow support and lower input-token cost are central to the workload. Choose Grok Build 0.1 when coding workflow support and larger context windows 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
Which has a larger context window, Composer 2 or Grok Build 0.1?
Grok Build 0.1 supports 256K tokens, while Composer 2 supports 200K tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Which is cheaper, Composer 2 or Grok Build 0.1?
Composer 2 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Composer 2 costs $0.5/1M input and $2.5/1M output tokens. Grok Build 0.1 costs $1/1M input and $2/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Composer 2 or Grok Build 0.1 open source?
Composer 2 is listed under Proprietary. Grok Build 0.1 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 reasoning mode, Composer 2 or Grok Build 0.1?
Grok Build 0.1 has the clearer documented reasoning mode signal in this comparison. If reasoning mode is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for function calling, Composer 2 or Grok Build 0.1?
Both Composer 2 and Grok Build 0.1 expose function calling. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Where can I run Composer 2 and Grok Build 0.1?
Composer 2 is available on Cursor. Grok Build 0.1 is available on xAI Console. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-20. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.