Model comparison
Grok Build 0.1 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B
Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok Build 0.1 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok Build 0.1 leads 32.2 to 15.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 9.1% for Grok Build 0.1 and 0% for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
- Both cost about the same: $1 input and $2 output per million tokens.
- Grok Build 0.1 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3 235B-A22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.4 | 43.5 |
| Released | 2026-04-16 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | 131K |
| Max output | 256K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 3 | 49 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Grok Build 0.1: 43.1 (#91), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 50.2% | 42.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 59.6% |
| WeirdML | — | 41% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1445 |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 235B-A22B leads
Grok Build 0.1: 22.7 (#129), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 52.1% |
| GBAEval | 2.4% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | -11.34 |
Reasoning Grok Build 0.1 leads
Grok Build 0.1: 32.2 (#77), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 9.1% | 0% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 1.3% |
| SimpleBench | — | 31% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 69.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 11% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1433 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| DTBench | — | 80.3% |
| LMCA | — | 29.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.85 |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.7 |
Math Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 71.8% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1432 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 68.9% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 8.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 80.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 40.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 84.4% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 72.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1463 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1409 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1481 |
| LMArena French | — | 1445 |
| LMArena German | — | 1433 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1391 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1411 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1430 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 83.5% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1408 |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 75% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1426 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3 235B-A22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1419 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1384 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1366 |
| WildBench | — | 86.6% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1432 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok Build 0.1 better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?
Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen3 235B-A22B?
Qwen3 235B-A22B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Grok Build 0.1 lists at $1 and $2.
Is Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?
Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 43.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok Build 0.1 does, with 256K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Grok Build 0.1 and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok Build 0.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.