Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Grok 4.6 
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next Verdict
- Grok 4.6 (medium) leads on quality: 66.2 vs 61.6.
- Grok 4.6 (medium) is stronger in agents & tools, composite, knowledge, long context, reasoning.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is stronger in coding, multimodal.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 13× cheaper ($0.230 vs $3.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Grok 4.6 (medium) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 66.2 | 61.6 |
| Agents & tools score | 73.3 | 65.8 |
| Coding score | 64.1 | 71.2 |
| Composite score | 83.6 | 67.4 |
| Knowledge score | 77.6 | 59.6 |
| Long context score | 67.0 | 66.3 |
| Reasoning score | 67.7 | 63.4 |
| Multimodal score | – | 64.3 |
| Blended price $/M | $3.00 | $0.230 |
| Output speed | 57 tok/s | 55 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 34.1 s | 39.0 s |
| Context window | 500k | 256k |
| SciCode | 54.6% | – |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1635 |
| LMArena Agent | – | -0.1 |
| LiveBench | – | 76.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 87.4% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 72.5% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 61.6% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 85.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 74.2% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 74.6% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 77.1% |
| AA Intelligence Index | 43.0 | 39.9 |
| AA-LCR | 81.0% | 79.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 79.8% |
| AA-Omniscience | 28 | -9.7 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 93.5% | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 42.1% | 38.0% |
| SciCode (AA) | 55.9% | 50.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.5% | – |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | – |
| CritPt | 17.7% | 11.1% |
| GDPval (AA) | 57.1% | 57.4% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | 44.3% | 45.4% |
| DeepSWE | 67.5% | – |
| CursorBench | 67.1% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next: questions
- Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Grok 4.6 (medium) leads on quality: 66.2 vs 61.6. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Grok 4.6 (medium) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for coding?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores higher in coding (71 vs 64 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for agentic tasks?
- Grok 4.6 scores higher in agentic tasks (73 vs 66 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is cheaper: $0.230 against $3.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Grok 4.6 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?
- Grok 4.6 streams faster: 57 against 55 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Grok 4.6 accepts more context: 500k against 256k tokens.