Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Grok 4.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#22); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.5 xAI

55.0

Rank #22 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

35.1

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 Flash in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Grok 4.5 leads 44.4 to 31.2.
  • Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.47 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
  • Qwen3.8 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.

Side by side

Grok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index55.035.1
Released2026-07-082026-08-26
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window500K1M
Max output500K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2$0.15
Output $ / M tokens$6$0.47
Results tracked521

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 51.7 (#34), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
DeepSWE53.8%—
FrontierCode42.4%—
LMArena WebDev1552—
SciCode54.1%—
WeirdML46.4%—
LMArena Coding1473—
ALE-Bench1,309—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#15), Qwen3.8 Flash: 31.2

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
GDP.pdf14%16.6%
APEX-Agents56.2%—
τ²-bench Banking47.9%—
PostTrainBench23.4%—
GBAEval65.4%—
LMArena Search1213—
Vending-Bench 23,887—

Reasoning Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 56.0 (#23), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
ARC-AGI-252.6%—
SimpleBench70%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.9%—
ARC-AGI-187.2%—
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles36%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1462—
DTBench96.5%—
LMCA45.2%—
Surface Evolver Bench74.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.02—

Math Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 60.7 (#29), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)57.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 424.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench31%—
LMArena Math1457—

Knowledge Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#21), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
GPQA Diamond93.4%—
SimpleQA Verified48.3%—
LMArena Expert1466—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 37.8 (#63), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Vision1287—
Blueprint-Bench 227.3%—
Furniture Assembly22.5%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 54.5 (#43), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Non-English1439—
LMArena Chinese1497—
LMArena French1458—
LMArena German1448—
LMArena Japanese1425—
LMArena Korean1402—
LMArena Russian1447—
LMArena Spanish1452—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 76.3 (#45), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1446—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#54), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1463—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 65.9 (#40), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Text1448—
LMArena Creative Writing1442—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—
LMArena Multi-Turn1457—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.5 better than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Grok 4.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#22); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.5 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.47 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.8 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 500K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Qwen3.8 Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Flash has 1.

Related comparisons

Go deeper