Grok 4.6 (low) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.6 (low) by SpaceXAI or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-09.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.6 (low) scores 25.3 points higher (35.4 vs 10.1) but costs 1.6× as much to run the benchmark ($761 vs $476; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick Grok 4.6 (low) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3 Coder Next.
| Metric | Grok 4.6 (low) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 35.4 | 10.1 | −71.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 71.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $760.75 | $476.03 | −37.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 37.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 15.16s | 5.52s | −63.6% Qwen3 Coder Next is 63.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Grok 4.6 (low): 71.5% less intelligence, 37.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 63.6% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.6 (low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Grok 4.6 (low)Qwen3 Coder 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-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-6-low/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill