Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.3 vs Qwen3.6 27B

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.3 xAI

43.8

Rank #86 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.2

Rank #117 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.3 leads 35.9 to 25.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 90.7% for Grok 4.3 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 4.3.
  • Grok 4.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.842.2
Released2026-04-172026-04-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output30K66K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$3.60
Results tracked4011

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
SciCode47.3%37.3%
LMArena WebDev1357—
WeirdML49.9%—
LMArena Coding1415—
ALE-Bench944.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
GDP.pdf8%—
LMArena Search1165—
Vending-Bench 235.26—

Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
CritPt8%0.9%
Chess Puzzles25%22%
DTBench90.7%78.1%
LMCA38.3%34.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index149.16146.5
NYT Connections (extended)55.2%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1396—
Mystery Game Puzzles—7%
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Qwen3.6 27B leads

Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)42.8%35.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.3%91.1%
FrontierMath Tier 414.6%—
ProofBench11%—
LMArena Math1388—

Knowledge Too close to call

Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
GPQA Diamond88.8%85.9%
SimpleQA Verified33.2%—
LMArena Expert1385—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Vision1229—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Non-English1385—
LMArena Chinese1422—
LMArena French1412—
LMArena German1395—
LMArena Japanese1379—
LMArena Korean1356—
LMArena Russian1399—
LMArena Spanish1398—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Instruction Following1366—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123), Qwen3.6 27B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
LMArena Longer Query1393—

Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Qwen3.6 27B
EQ-Bench 410751026
LMArena Text1397—
LMArena Creative Writing1380—
LMArena Multi-Turn1406—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.3 better than Qwen3.6 27B?

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.3 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 4.3 lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Is Grok 4.3 or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?

Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.3 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.3 and Qwen3.6 27B share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper