Grok 4.6 (Low) vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.6 (Low) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Grok 4.6 (Low): 13.4% more intelligence, 40.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 287.9% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Grok 4.6 (Low) | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 35.1 | 39.8 | +13.4% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 13.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $613.92 | $362.72 | −40.9% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 40.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.02s | 50.51s | +287.9% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 287.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.6 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Grok 4.6 (Low)Qwen3.8-Flash-NextToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-6-low/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-6-low/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill