ChatGPT Dots vs Grok Bot: Which AI Agent Fits Your Work?

ChatGPT dots and xAI's Grok Bot are both always-on work agents with their own cloud computers. Grok Bot is far cheaper to reach: it is included with every SuperGrok plan and Cursor Pro at $20 a month, has a free trial credit, and adds a terminal and the ability to learn a task by watching you do it. Dots cost $100 a month or more but offer 4,000+ app connections, Slack and Teams access, and more mature permission controls. Developers and Cursor users should pick Grok Bot; teams living in Slack or Teams should pick dots.

Disclosure: we have no affiliate relationship with OpenAI, xAI or Cursor. Some other pages on this site carry affiliate links, and they never change our picks. See our affiliate disclosure.

Key takeaways

• Cheapest entry: Grok Bot comes with Cursor Pro at $20 a month or SuperGrok at $30 a month. Dots start at $100 a month on ChatGPT Pro.
• The "$120 a month" Grok Bot figure is wrong for most people. That is one Cursor Teams Premium seat, and it was the launch-day price floor before xAI widened access on 26 August.
• Model: dots run GPT-6 Astra. Grok Bot does not disclose its model: "Cursor manages model selection."
• Apps: dots connect to 4,000+ apps by plugin. Grok Bot signs into sites directly, "including platforms with no clean API or MCP."
• Platforms: Grok Bot has native apps for macOS, Windows, Linux, iOS and Android. Dots are created on desktop and then reached through ChatGPT, Slack and Teams.

ChatGPT dots vs Grok Bot at a glance

Verified against OpenAI, x.ai, docs.x.ai and Cursor's own pages, 1 October 2026.

How much do ChatGPT dots and Grok Bot cost?

Grok Bot is much cheaper to start. When it launched on 11 August it was limited to the top tiers, which is where the widely repeated $120 figure comes from. On 26 August xAI announced: "Grok Bot is now included with all SuperGrok, Cursor Pro, and Cursor Teams plans."

Today's cheapest routes are Cursor Pro at $20 a month and SuperGrok at $30 a month. "Grok Bot comes with its own usage, separate from your Grok and Cursor plans," and that usage resets weekly. Higher tiers (Cursor Ultra at $200, SuperGrok Heavy) get the "Highest" allowance. There is also a free trial credit with a seven-day window, and on-demand usage once you run out.

Dots are included only with ChatGPT Pro ($100, $200 or $500 a month) and Business Premium ($100 per user a month annually, two-seat minimum). The first dot is free with the plan, and OpenAI has not published usage numbers.

At $20 versus $100, Grok Bot wins on price unless you already pay for Pro.

Which is better for developers?

Grok Bot, clearly. It is built on Cursor's infrastructure, and "The computers Bots work on run in Cursor's cloud." Each user's computer has "a browser, filesystem, and terminal," so a Bot can run scripts, manage files and work on code, not just click through websites.

xAI says teams inside the company used Bots for "sales outbound, marketing campaigns, office operations, bug fixes, and more." The bundle with Cursor plans means many developers already have access without realising it.

Dots are not without developer reach. A dot can start Codex cloud tasks, and those count against your normal ChatGPT usage. But the dot itself is a general work agent, and its computer is described as Linux plus Chrome, without the terminal-first design.

If you write code for a living and already pay for Cursor, try Grok Bot before spending $100 a month on anything else.

Which is better for business teams?

ChatGPT dots. The reasons are reach and familiarity.

4,000+ apps. OpenAI's plugin ecosystem connects dots to most business software without any setup on the vendor's side.

Slack and Teams. "You can also message your dot in Slack and Teams." Your colleagues can work with it where they already talk.

Permission design. Every action type can be set to "Take action without asking / Take action if pre-approved / Ask before taking action / Hand off to you." Password changes and money transfers always need a human.

Grok Bot is catching up. Team Bots entered public beta on 28 September for Teams and Enterprise plans, and the Enterprise tier adds audit logs, network controls and action recording. But on self-serve Teams plans, network egress defaults to allow-all, and the admin tooling is newer.

For an ops or sales team that lives in Slack, dots are the safer bet today.

Which is better at working with awkward websites?

Grok Bot has the edge in principle. xAI says Bots "can sign in and work across apps, tools, and websites, including platforms with no clean API or MCP." That matters for the internal portals, supplier sites and legacy tools that no plugin ecosystem covers.

It also learns by example. You can "ask it to follow along the next time you do a job. It watches the steps... saves your workflow as a routine." xAI's docs add the limits: you record "one browser workflow," "the recording is limited to ten minutes," and the feature is rolling out gradually.

Both agents hit the same wall with sites that resist automation. xAI's own docs are candid: "A site may still block automation, require a new login, present a CAPTCHA, or require human confirmation," and "Some services flag datacenter IP addresses." Dots have the same problem; OpenAI hands CAPTCHAs and sensitive steps back to you.

Which is safer?

Both companies are frank about the risks, and both hand the most sensitive steps back to you. Grok Bot routes passwords, two-factor codes, CAPTCHAs and payments to a manual takeover. Dots do the same for password changes and money transfers.

Each has one design detail to understand before you connect anything.

Grok Bot shares one computer across all your Bots. The docs say: "The computer is assigned per user, not per Bot. Do not use separate Bots as a security boundary." Files and logged-in sessions are visible to every Bot you run. Its model-based Auto Review "should complement, not replace, least privilege."

Dots keep memories you cannot inspect. "You currently cannot view, delete or directly modify individual dot memories," and disconnecting an app does not erase what the dot already learned from it.

On reliability, OpenAI's system card reports unwanted persistence in 17.4% of Astra test runs at maximum reasoning budget. xAI publishes no equivalent figures, which is not the same as having none.

Which should you choose?

Choose Grok Bot if you are a developer, you already pay for Cursor or SuperGrok, you need an agent to work with sites that have no API, or you want to try an always-on agent for $20 rather than $100. Use the free trial credit first.

Choose ChatGPT dots if your team works in Slack or Teams, you need many business apps connected, or you already pay for ChatGPT Pro. In the UK, note that dots need Business Premium (two seats minimum) because Pro is excluded there.

Choose neither if you want a personal agent for shopping and errands. Meta's free Muse is built for that; see Muse vs ChatGPT Dots and our guide to getting 1 billion free Muse tokens.

The verdict

Grok Bot is the better value and the better tool for technical users: five times cheaper at entry, a real terminal, and teach-by-watching. ChatGPT dots are the better product for business teams, with far wider app reach and permissions that are easier to reason about.

The honest caveat for Grok Bot is that it is still labelled beta and does not say which model you are using. For dots, it is the price and a launch-week record that included failed keynote demos. Neither is a set-and-forget employee yet.

To compare all three agents together, read our Muse vs Dots vs Grok Bot breakdown.

Related reading: ChatGPT dots explained and n8n vs Zapier vs Make.

Prices verified on OpenAI's help center, x.ai and cursor.com on 1 October 2026. SuperGrok Heavy pricing could not be confirmed on xAI's own page, so it is omitted.