Head-to-head comparison across 4benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.3
79
Qwen3.5 397B
64
Verified leaderboard positions: Grok 4.3 unranked · Qwen3.5 397B #15
Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5 397B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+13.0 difference
Knowledge
+11.3 difference
Multimodal
+1.5 difference
Inst. Following
+11.3 difference
Grok 4.3
Qwen3.5 397B
$1.25 / $2.5
$0.6 / $3.6
209 t/s
96 t/s
12.36s
2.44s
1M
128K
Pick Grok 4.3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5 397B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Grok 4.3 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 79 to 64. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5 397B is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok 4.3. Grok 4.3 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Qwen3.5 397B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Grok 4.3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Qwen3.5 397B.
Grok 4.3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 79 to 64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 35% and 28.7%.
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.2 versus 53.9. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.3 versus 47.3. Grok 4.3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.6 versus 78.1. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 92.6 versus 81.3. Grok 4.3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.