BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases4

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.6 Max

Full profiles: Grok 4.6 (SpaceXAI) and Qwen3.6 Max (Alibaba): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 8 sources

As of 2 Nov 2026, Grok 4.6 and Qwen3.6 Max are neck and neck on quality (60.5 vs 62.4 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±4.5 margin), and they cost about the same at $3.00 vs $2.92 per 1M tokens blended. Choose Grok 4.6 for coding (61 vs 56) and reasoning (64 vs 63); choose Qwen3.6 Max for agents & tools (72 vs 58) and maths (65 vs 63).

Key facts (as of 2 Nov 2026)

  • Grok 4.6 scores 60.5 on the BenchLeader Index and Qwen3.6 Max scores 62.4 (BenchLeader, 2 Nov 2026).
  • Grok 4.6 costs $3.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 2 Nov 2026).
  • Qwen3.6 Max costs $2.92 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 2 Nov 2026).
  • Of the 18 benchmarks both models have, Grok 4.6 leads 10 (BenchLeader, 2 Nov 2026).
  • On Arena WebDev, Grok 4.6 is rated 1616 and Qwen3.6 Max 1482 (LMArena, as published by 2 Nov 2026).
Grok 4.6 benchmarks high SpaceXAI Qwen3.6 Max benchmarks max AlibabaAdd a third model

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingGrok 4.661 vs 56 category score; Arena WebDev 1616 vs 1482Medium
Agents & tool useQwen3.6 Max72 vs 58 category scoreHigh
MathsQwen3.6 Max65 vs 63 category score; Arena Maths 1476 vs 1443Medium
ReasoningGrok 4.664 vs 63 category score; GPQA Diamond 94.0% vs 87.4%Medium
KnowledgeEither60 vs 60 category score; SimpleQA Verified 49.3% vs 52.0%Either
Long documentsEither65 vs 65 category score; AA-LCR v1.1 80.3% vs 80.7%Either
Chat quality (human preference)Either64 vs 65 on Arena votesEither
Lowest costEither$3.00 vs $2.96 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.144 vs $0.111–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Grok 4.6 (high) and Qwen3.6 Max (max) are neck and neck on quality (60.5 vs 62.4, within the ±4.5 margin).
  • Grok 4.6 (high) is stronger in coding, multimodal, reasoning.
  • Qwen3.6 Max (max) is stronger in agents & tools, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths, instruction following.
  • They cost about the same ($2.96 per 1M blended).

At a glance

SpecGrok 4.6Qwen3.6 Max
DeveloperSpaceXAIAlibaba
Released11 Aug 202620 Apr 2026
Context window (tokens)500,000245,800
Compared atGrok 4.6 (high)Qwen3.6 Max (max)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$2.00 / $6.00 / $0.500$1.32 / $7.90 / $0.132

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryGrok 4.6 (high)Qwen3.6 Max (max)Leader
Reasoning64.062.7Grok 4.6
Coding61.356.3Grok 4.6
Agents & tools58.172.1Qwen3.6 Max
Maths63.364.7Qwen3.6 Max
Knowledge59.660.0level
Instruction following–74.6not comparable
Human preference64.064.6level
Multimodal59.8–not comparable
Long context65.065.2level

On one chart

Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.

2550 avg75ReasoningCodingAgents & toolsMathsKnowledgeLong contextHumanpreferenceGrok 4.6, Reasoning: 64.0Grok 4.6, Coding: 61.3Grok 4.6, Agents & tools: 58.1Grok 4.6, Maths: 63.3Grok 4.6, Knowledge: 59.6Grok 4.6, Long context: 65.0Grok 4.6, Human preference: 64.0Qwen3.6 Max, Reasoning: 62.7Qwen3.6 Max, Coding: 56.3Qwen3.6 Max, Agents & tools: 72.1Qwen3.6 Max, Maths: 64.7Qwen3.6 Max, Knowledge: 60.0Qwen3.6 Max, Long context: 65.2Qwen3.6 Max, Human preference: 64.6

Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Instruction following, Multimodal.

ModelIndex

Where sources disagree

Across the 18 benchmarks both have, Grok 4.6 leads 10, Qwen3.6 Max leads 8. Every overall index that rates both puts Qwen3.6 Max ahead.

Overall indexGrok 4.6 (high)Qwen3.6 Max (max)Leader
BenchLeader Index60.562.4neck and neck
Arena Text14561460Qwen3.6 Max

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.

MeasureGrok 4.6 (high)Qwen3.6 Max (max)
Blended price per 1M tokens$3.00$2.96
Input / output per 1M$2.00 / $6.00$1.32 / $7.90
Cached input per 1M$0.500$0.132
Price per task: chat reply$0.0026$0.0029
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.028$0.021
Price per task: code edit$0.021$0.020
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.144$0.111
Price per task: structured extraction$0.0052$0.0042
Agentic coding session, input mostly cached$0.076$0.057
Output speed70 tok/s–
Time to first answer40.0 s–
Time to a complete answer47.2 s–

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Grok 4.6 (high) scores 60.5 and takes 40 s to its first answer token; Grok 4.6 (medium) scores 59.6 in 35 s, Grok 4.6 (xhigh) scores 58.4 in 52 s. Qwen3.6 Max (max) scores 62.4. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

114 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherGrok 4.6 (high)Qwen3.6 Max (max)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader60.562.4
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader58.172.1
Coding scoreBenchLeader61.356.3
Human preference scoreBenchLeader64.064.6
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader59.660.0
Long context scoreBenchLeader65.065.2
Maths scoreBenchLeader63.364.7
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader59.8–
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader64.062.7
Instruction following scoreBenchLeader–74.6
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$3.00$2.96
Output speedBenchLeader70 tok/s–
Time to first answerBenchLeader40.0 s–
Context windowBenchLeader500,000 tokens245,800 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub94.0%87.4%
SimpleBenchSimpleBench75.9%†63.0%
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)14811482
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench91.2%†–
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench90.5%†–
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis95.0%88.8%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis42.9%30.8%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI94.7%–
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize87.0%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize65.1%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize2.1%†–
CritPtArtificial Analysis17.1%3.7%
MysteryMechanismVals AI30.6%–
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub33.0%–
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub34.0%†19.0%†
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub48.5%†42.5%
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub97.3%†87.2%
ForecastBenchForecastBench65.5%†–
Coding
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–76.7%
SciCodeSciCode56.5%–
WeirdMLWeirdML67.3%–
FrontierCodeCognition48.0%†–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15091511
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)16161482
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench89.1%†–
Show all 114 benchmarks
MetricPublisherGrok 4.6 (high)Qwen3.6 Max (max)
Coding
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench76.8%†–
LiveCodeBenchVals AI88.2%–
IOIVals AI47.6%–
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI95.6%72.8%
Code MigrationVals AI44.6%–
ProgramBenchVals AI1.0%–
Vibe Code Bench 1-100Vals AI14.8%–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI76.2%–
MirrorCodeEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub41.1%†–
DeepSWE v1.1Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub65.2%–
CursorBenchCursor40.4%–
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub1508.1†–
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub25.3%†–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis21.2%–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis88.4%–
Startrise FrontendStartrise72.1%†–
GameBench 2 OverallDuelLab GameBench 261.0†–
GameBench 2 by reasoning settingDuelLab GameBench 271.4†–
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench20.3%–
APEX-AgentsMercor65.3%†–
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)0.5†–
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench28.0%†–
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench49.4%†–
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench57.0%†–
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis–43.9%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis–95.9%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI78.3%–
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis50.7%–
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis41.3%–
CyberBenchVals AI67.7%–
Finance Agent v2Vals AI53.7%–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI15.8%–
Legal Research BenchVals AI48.1%–
SkillsBenchVals AI55.8%–
Tax Agent BenchVals AI33.1%–
Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)Vals AI–51.7%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI17.2%–
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI11.4%–
Time Horizon Index: KSPVals AI5.8%–
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs9047.0†4254.2
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis66.7%–
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis17.0%–
EnterpriseOps-GymArtificial Analysis48.3%–
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1529–
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis6.2%–
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub66.0%†–
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub31.7%†–
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub97.8%91.1%
ProofBenchVals AI51.0%†–
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench92.6%†–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)14431476
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub49.3%52.0%
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench75.3%†–
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench84.5%†–
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench73.9%†–
MMLU-ProVals AI89.4%–
LegalBenchVals AI86.3%–
CorpFinVals AI66.2%66.5%
TaxEvalVals AI71.1%–
BioMysteryBenchVals AI72.2%–
CaseLaw v2Vals AI–47.9%
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI62.7%–
MedCodeVals AI44.7%–
MedScribeVals AI86.5%–
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI66.8%–
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub30.5%†–
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub16.0%–
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench83.7%†–
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench71.9%†–
IFBenchArtificial Analysis–76.6%
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)14511451
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)14561460
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14421437
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)14481467
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)14741473
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1263–
LiveBench DesignLiveBench79.8%†–
MortgageTaxVals AI64.2%–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub33.2%†–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis80.3%80.7%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1461–
MLCRArtificial Analysis15.6%–
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub156.9†149.4
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench67.8%†–
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench78.0%†–
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis44.328.4
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis321.5297.1
Vals RSI IndexVals AI25.5%†–
Vals Science IndexVals AI38.1%–

Data as of 2026-11-02. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

DuelLab GameBench 2, release gb2-20261026-cb69502a12d9 (https://benchmarks.duellab.org/releases/gb2-20261026-cb69502a12d9/), CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Scores mapped to BenchLeader model names; not endorsed by DuelLab.

What changed

  • Grok 4.6 (high): 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Qwen3.6 Max (max): 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Grok 4.6 (high): BenchLeader Index 61.4 → 60.9.
  • Grok 4.6 (high): 2 new results (Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1, Vals Science Index).
  • Qwen3.6 Max (max): BenchLeader Index 63.3 → 62.8.
  • Grok 4.6 (high): 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.6 (high): 3 new results (GDPval-AA v2.1, normalised score, AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracy, AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucination).
  • Grok 4.6 (high): 1 new result (ProgramBench); 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.6 (high): 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.6 (high): 1 new result (Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)).

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.6 Max: questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3.6 Max?
Grok 4.6 (high) and Qwen3.6 Max (max) are neck and neck on quality (60.5 vs 62.4, within the ±4.5 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 2 Nov 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.6 Max: which is cheaper, and will that change?
Qwen3.6 Max is cheaper today: $2.92 against $3.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is Grok 4.6 or Qwen3.6 Max better for coding?
Grok 4.6 scores higher in coding (61 vs 56 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Arena WebDev, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 1616 for Grok 4.6 against 1482 for Qwen3.6 Max.
Is Grok 4.6 or Qwen3.6 Max better for agents and tool use?
Qwen3.6 Max scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Which is better for long documents?
They are level on long-context benchmarks (65 vs 65). Grok 4.6 accepts more context: 500,000 against 245,800 tokens for Qwen3.6 Max.
More questions (2)
Do independent benchmarks agree on Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.6 Max?
Across the 18 benchmarks both have, Grok 4.6 leads 10, Qwen3.6 Max leads 8. Every overall index that rates both puts Qwen3.6 Max ahead.
When was Grok 4.6 released?
Grok 4.6 was released on 11 Aug 2026.