Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3 7
Grok 4.6 
Qwen3 7 Verdict
- Grok 4.6 (medium) leads on quality: 63.9 vs 61.3.
- Grok 4.6 (medium) is stronger in coding, composite, knowledge, long context.
- Qwen3 7 (max) is stronger in reasoning, agents & tools, human preference, instruction following, maths.
- Grok 4.6 (medium) is 1.3× cheaper ($3.00 vs $3.75 per 1M blended).
- Qwen3 7 (max) streams 3.2× faster (169 vs 53 tokens per second).
| Metric | Grok 4.6 (medium) | Qwen3 7 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.9 | 61.3 |
| Coding score | 64.1 | 61.4 |
| Composite score | 83.4 | 56.4 |
| Knowledge score | 77.5 | 63.6 |
| Long context score | 67.1 | 66.0 |
| Reasoning score | 62.1 | 66.8 |
| Agents & tools score | – | 56.0 |
| Human preference score | – | 57.2 |
| Instruction following score | – | 77.6 |
| Maths score | – | 57.4 |
| Blended price $/M | $3.00 | $3.75 |
| Output speed | 53 tok/s | 169 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 33.4 s | 16.5 s |
| Context window | 500k | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 90.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 95.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 77.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 55.8% |
| SimpleBench | – | 70.4% |
| SciCode | 54.6% | 48.8% |
| ProofBench | – | 26.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 153.7 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1474 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1495 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1525 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1517 |
| LMArena Agent | – | -3.1 |
| LiveBench | – | 73.1% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 83.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 74.2% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 43.6% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 85.3% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 71.8% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 79.7% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 43.0 | 29.9 |
| IFBench | – | 80.5% |
| AA-LCR | 81.0% | 79.0% |
| AA-Omniscience | 28 | 13.5 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 50.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 93.5% | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 42.1% | 40.5% |
| SciCode (AA) | 55.9% | 49.5% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 94.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 87.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | – | 89.3% |
| IOI | – | 46.8% |
| LegalBench | – | 84.9% |
| CorpFin | – | 63.7% |
| TaxEval | – | 75.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | 61.0% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 68.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | – | 90.2% |
| Vals Index | – | 44.8 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | – | 1110 |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.5% | – |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3 7: questions
- Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3 7?
- Grok 4.6 (medium) leads on quality: 63.9 vs 61.3. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Grok 4.6 (medium) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3 7 for coding?
- Grok 4.6 scores higher in coding (64 vs 61 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6 or Qwen3 7?
- Grok 4.6 is cheaper: $3.00 against $3.75 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Grok 4.6 or Qwen3 7?
- Qwen3 7 streams faster: 169 against 53 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Qwen3 7 accepts more context: 1M against 500k tokens.