Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL by NVIDIA? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) scores 17.7 points higher (44.2 vs 26.5) but costs 7.9× as much to run the benchmark ($2242 vs $283; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 26.5, and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL when 26.5 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 44.2 | 26.5 | −40.0% Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is 40.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,241.91 | $282.51 | −87.4% Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is 87.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 43.76s | 6.20s | −85.8% Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is 85.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.23 / $0.57 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL vs Grok 4.6 (Xhigh): 40.0% less intelligence, 87.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 85.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh)Nemotron 3.5 Super VLToday'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-xhigh/nemotron-3-5-super-vl · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-6-xhigh/nemotron-3-5-super-vl?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill