# Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Flash

> Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 55× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-6-vs-qwen3-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 7

## Summary

- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.7 Flash in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.3 to 27.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 66% for Grok 4.6 and 19.3% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
- Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.6.
- Qwen3.7 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 500K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 56.8 | 39.5 |
| Rank | 19 | 152 |
| Context | 500K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.03 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $0.13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.6: 58.0 (#14)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 67.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 48% | — |
| CursorBench | 41.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 25.3% | — |
| SciCode | 56.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 67.3% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1464 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,508 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#25)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 17.2% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,047 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.6: 61.3 (#18)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 27.3 (#108)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80% | 43.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 40% | 23% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | 15% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.48 | 144.62 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 67.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 75.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.5% | — |
| CritPt | 19.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 30.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1445 | — |
| DTBench | 97.3% | — |
| LMCA | 48.5% | — |

## Math

- Grok 4.6: 66.8 (#19)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 37.3 (#100)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 66% | 19.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 99.2% | 86.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| ProofBench | 51% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1416 | — |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#18)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#69)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94% | 82.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 49.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1463 | — |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.6: 43.9 (#18)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1265 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 40% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.6: 53.3 (#67)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1422 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1479 | — |
| LMArena French | 1458 | — |
| LMArena German | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1383 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1408 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.6: 75.6 (#59)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1431 | — |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.6: 44.4 (#62)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1453 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.6: 62.5 (#77)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1430 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1422 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 55× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; Grok 4.6 lists at $2 and $6.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 500K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.