Qwen3.8 Flash vs Grok 4.6
Model Markets Rankings
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
| Ranking | Qwen3.8-Flash | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v1.2 | UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort | #13 of 2267.6 score |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 36-model eligible cohort | #18 of 36$0.097 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.0 | UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort | #8 of 2256.6 score |
Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Qwen3.8-Flash | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Qwen | xAI |
| Family | Qwen3 8 Flash | Grok 4 |
| Model | Qwen3.8-Flash | Grok 4.6 |
| Version | Qwen3.8-Flash | Grok 4.6 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | 2026-02-01 |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 500K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | Unknown |
| Open weights | No | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | No |
| Provider access | Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Xai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | agents, chat, computer-use, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
13 comparable fields · 8 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Qwen3.8 Flash Capabilities
Grok 4.6 Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
 GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | vs | Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | family variantsimage, text, video |
 Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
 Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
| vs | Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Qwen3.8 Flash vs Grok 4.6 FAQs
Is Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 Flash and Grok 4.6, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6?+
Qwen3.8 Flash is $0.15 and Grok 4.6 is $2.00 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Qwen3.8 Flash is $0.47 and Grok 4.6 is $6.00 per million tokens, so Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6?+
Qwen3.8 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.8 Flash supports 1,000K and Grok 4.6 supports 500K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Qwen3.8 Flash is not marked open weight; Grok 4.6 is not marked open weight.
Can Qwen3.8 Flash and Grok 4.6 understand images?+
Qwen3.8 Flash is documented with image input; Grok 4.6 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Qwen3.8 Flash is 131K and Grok 4.6 is —.
Do Qwen3.8 Flash and Grok 4.6 support reasoning and tool use?+
Qwen3.8 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Grok 4.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6?+
Qwen3.8 Flash has 3 sourced provider routes; Grok 4.6 has 1, so Qwen3.8 Flash has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 Flash or Grok 4.6?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.