# Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

> Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 7.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-5-vs-qwen3-6-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 10

## Summary

- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.0 to 28.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 70% for Grok 4.5 and 35.2% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
- Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 55.0 | 38.4 |
| Rank | 22 | 176 |
| Context | 500K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.19 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $1.13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.5: 51.7 (#34)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 1,309 | 326.4 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1552 | — |
| SciCode | 54.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 46.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1473 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#15)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 56.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 47.9% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 23.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.4% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1213 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,887 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.5: 56.0 (#23)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 70% | 35.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | 36% | 20% |
| DTBench | 96.5% | 77.1% |
| LMCA | 45.2% | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.02 | 143.26 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 52.6% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.2% | — |
| CritPt | 15.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 74.4% | — |

## Math

- Grok 4.5: 60.7 (#29)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | 22.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 24.4% | — |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1457 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#21)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.4% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48.3% | 15.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1466 | — |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.5: 37.8 (#63)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1287 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 27.3% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.5: 54.5 (#43)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1497 | — |
| LMArena French | 1458 | — |
| LMArena German | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1402 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1452 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.5: 76.3 (#45)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1446 | — |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#54)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.5: 65.9 (#40)
- Qwen3.6 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1579 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1457 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.5 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 7.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Grok 4.5 or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 500K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.