Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.5 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent xAI

45.5

Rank #62 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.4

Rank #176 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 42.4 to 28.4.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.

Side by side

Grok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index45.538.4
Released2026-03-092026-04-27
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output30K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$1.13
Results tracked2013

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#91), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Coding1458—
ALE-Bench—326.4

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —, Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Search1204—

Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 42.4 (#44), Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
SimpleBench—35.2%
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%—
Chess Puzzles—20%
LMArena Hard Prompts1448—
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
DTBench—77.1%
LMCA—31%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.26

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 36.6 (#106), Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—22.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
LMArena Math1441—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.7 (#116), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—15.9%
LMArena Expert1445—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.8 (#44), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Vision1259—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.6 (#40), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Non-English1440—
LMArena Chinese1475—
LMArena French1467—
LMArena German1456—
LMArena Japanese1405—
LMArena Korean1416—
LMArena Russian1457—
LMArena Spanish1447—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 75.0 (#80), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1420—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#84), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1430—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.1 (#57), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 Multi-AgentQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1450—
LMArena Creative Writing1435—
LMArena Multi-Turn1451—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.5 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper