Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Grok 3 Mini
~49
0/8 categoriesQwen3.5-35B-A3B
67
Winner · 2/8 categoriesGrok 3 Mini· Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 3 Mini only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 67 to 49. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 72.6 against 41.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is LiveCodeBench, 41.5% to 74.6%.
Grok 3 Mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $0.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-35B-A3B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Grok 3 Mini.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Grok 3 Mini | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | — | 40.5% |
| BrowseComp | — | 61% |
| OSWorld-Verified | — | 54.5% |
| tau2-bench | — | 81.2% |
| CodingQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| LiveCodeBench | 41.5% | 74.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 69.2% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | — | 75.1% |
| Reasoning | ||
| LongBench v2 | — | 59% |
| KnowledgeQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins | ||
| GPQA | 66.2% | 84.2% |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.9% | 85.3% |
| SimpleQA | 21.7% | — |
| SuperGPQA | — | 63.4% |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | — | 91.9% |
| Multilingual | ||
| MMLU-ProX | — | 81% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2024 | 95.8% | — |
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is ahead overall, 67 to 49. The biggest single separator in this matchup is LiveCodeBench, where the scores are 41.5% and 74.6%.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.3 versus 59.8. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.6 versus 41.5. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.