Model comparison
Grok 4.3 vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 43.6 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.3 costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 48.6 to 41.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 55.2% for Grok 4.3 and 74.1% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Grok 4.3 is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Grok 4.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
Side by side
| Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.6 | 51.1 |
| Released | 2026-04-17 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 30K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $1.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $7.80 |
| Results tracked | 40 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 41.3 (#117), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.6 (#50)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1357 | 1482 |
| LMArena Coding | 1415 | 1472 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| SciCode | 47.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 49.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 944.17 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.3: 27.6 (#93), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 35.26 | 4,254 |
| GDP.pdf | 8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1165 | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 34.9 (#60), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 40.8 (#47)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 55.2% | 74.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 25% | 20% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1397 | 1457 |
| DTBench | 90.7% | 87.2% |
| LMCA | 38.3% | 42.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.13 | 149.27 |
| SimpleBench | — | 63% |
| CritPt | 8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 19% |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 45.8 (#60), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 52.2 (#40)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1388 | 1465 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 42.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 14.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 11% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 23.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#57), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#35)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 88.8% | 87.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.2% | 52% |
| LMArena Expert | 1385 | 1476 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#96), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1231 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 0% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 50.7 (#114), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1385 | 1436 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1423 | 1487 |
| LMArena French | 1412 | 1449 |
| LMArena Russian | 1399 | 1444 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1402 | 1452 |
| LMArena German | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1357 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 72.3 (#135), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.8 (#51)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1366 | 1437 |
Long Context Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#118), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#59)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1393 | 1457 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
Grok 4.3: 58.6 (#112), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 64.0 (#58)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1380 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1406 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1075 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.3 better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 43.6 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.3 costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.3 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Grok 4.3 is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.
Is Grok 4.3 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 41.3 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 Max Preview share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.