Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.3
74
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
78
Pick Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window.
Coding
+6.8 difference
Knowledge
+20.0 difference
Grok 4.3
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
$1.25 / $2.5
N/A
209 t/s
N/A
12.36s
N/A
1M
256K
Pick Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 78 to 74. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)'s sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 73.9 against 53.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SciCode, 47.3% to 47%.
Grok 4.3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 78 to 74. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SciCode, where the scores are 47.3% and 47%.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 versus 53.9. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 54.1 versus 47.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench Hard is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.