Google Gemini 2.5 Pro vs xAI Grok-4 Heavy

Detailed comparison for LLMs

GooglexAI

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro is the more secure of the two: Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 16.1% and Grok-4 Heavy scores 18.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

Head-to-Head Overview

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the overall winner in this comparison!

Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)

ASR for Google Gemini 2.5 Pro vs xAI Grok-4 Heavy. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.

Overall (ASR)

Gemini 2.5 Pro
16.1%
Grok-4 Heavy
18.0%

TAP Attack Method (ASR)

Gemini 2.5 Pro
27.5%
Grok-4 Heavy
100.0%

Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)

Gemini 2.5 Pro
19.1%
Grok-4 Heavy
100.0%

Zero-Shot (ASR)

Gemini 2.5 Pro
1.6%
Grok-4 Heavy
100.0%

Key Highlights

  • Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower Overall (ASR).
  • Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
  • Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
  • Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).

Security Profile

Outward is better on every axis.

OverallTAPCrescendoZero-Shot
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Grok-4 Heavy
Full security profile
Google Gemini 2.5 Pro
Full security profile
xAI Grok-4 Heavy

Frequently asked questions

Is Google Gemini 2.5 Pro or xAI Grok-4 Heavy more secure?

On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro is the more secure of the two: Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 16.1% and Grok-4 Heavy scores 18.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.

What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Grok-4 Heavy?

Gemini 2.5 Pro has a 16.1% ASR and Grok-4 Heavy has a 18.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.

How were Gemini 2.5 Pro and Grok-4 Heavy tested?

Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.

Related Comparisons