whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
Alibaba Cloud (Qwen)

Qwen3.6-Flash

VS
xAI

Grok 4.3

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Grok 4.3 is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 0.0% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: Qwen3.6-Flash is 2.8x cheaper to run. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, Qwen3.6-Flash offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Grok 4.3 fully justifies the cost.

Model Specs

Qwen3.6-Flash

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/A
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
85.5%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)2.8x cheaper
$0.56Input: $0.25 | Output: $1.50
Speed
128 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Grok 4.3

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/A
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+4.6%)
90.1%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$1.56Input: $1.25 | Output: $2.50
Speed1.6x faster
209 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.6-Flash is cheaper than Grok 4.3. Qwen3.6-Flash has a blended cost of $0.56/1M tokens, which is about 2.8x cheaper than Grok 4.3 at $1.56/1M tokens.

Grok 4.3 is faster than Qwen3.6-Flash. Grok 4.3 generates 209 tokens per second (tps) compared to Qwen3.6-Flash which generates 128 tokens per second.

Coding benchmark scores are not currently recorded for these models.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard