Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs Qwen3.6 27B

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.2

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 25.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 90.1% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 78.1% for Qwen3.6 27B.
  • Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper at $0.60 / $3.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
  • Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.642.2
Released2026-02-172026-04-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output30K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$3.60
Results tracked4611

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena WebDev1375—
SciCode—37.3%
WeirdML52.3%—
LMArena Coding1459—
ALE-Bench1,150—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
Terminal-Bench57.3%—
τ²-bench Banking18%—
LMArena Search1189—
Vending-Bench 24,663—

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
Chess Puzzles24%22%
DTBench90.1%78.1%
LMCA38.7%34.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index151.98146.5
ARC-AGI-265.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
NYT Connections (extended)85.4%—
ARC-AGI-189.5%—
CritPt—0.9%
Thematic Generalization63.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1451—
Mystery Game Puzzles—7%
ForecastBench61.4—

Math Too close to call

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)44.9%35.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%91.1%
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
ProofBench14%—
LMArena Math1455—

Knowledge Too close to call

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond89.3%85.9%
SimpleQA Verified30.2%—
LMArena Expert1439—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—
LMArena Document1416—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Non-English1441—
LMArena Chinese1481—
LMArena French1476—
LMArena German1465—
LMArena Japanese1449—
LMArena Korean1417—
LMArena Russian1458—
LMArena Spanish1443—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Instruction Following1420—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
CL-bench22.2%—
CL-bench Life11.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1437—

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Text1451—
LMArena Creative Writing1438—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1574—
EQ-Bench 4—1026
LMArena Multi-Turn1456—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.60 per million input tokens and $3.60 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Qwen3.6 27B share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper