Ternary Bonsai 27B vs Grok Build 0.1
At a Glance
| Compare |  Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort | #1 of 44$0.0020 per LiveBench case |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $1.00Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $2.00Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 262K | 256K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 18, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Ternary Bonsai 27B | Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | PrismML | xAI |
| Family | Bonsai 27b | Grok Build |
| Model | Ternary Bonsai 27B | Grok Build 0.1 |
| Version | Ternary Bonsai 27B | Grok Build 0.1 |
| Lifecycle | active | preview |
| Released | 2026-07-04 | 2026-05-29 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 256K |
| Total parameters | 27B | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | Unknown |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Provider access | Together Ai (Standard) | Xai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools, vision | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
| Base model | Qwen3.6 27B | Unknown |
| Effective bit width | 1.58 bits per weight | Unknown |
| Language model size | 6.66 GiB | Unknown |
| Weight format | Ternary Q2_0 | Unknown |
Ternary Bonsai 27B Capabilities
Grok Build 0.1 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
 GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | vs | Ternary Bonsai 27BPrismML | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Ternary Bonsai 27B vs Grok Build 0.1 FAQs
Is Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Ternary Bonsai 27B and Grok Build 0.1, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1?+
Only Grok Build 0.1 has a directly sourced input price: $1.00 per million tokens. Only Grok Build 0.1 has a directly sourced output price: $2.00 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1?+
Ternary Bonsai 27B has the larger sourced context window. Ternary Bonsai 27B supports 262K and Grok Build 0.1 supports 256K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1 be self-hosted?+
Ternary Bonsai 27B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Ternary Bonsai 27B is open weight; Grok Build 0.1 is not marked open weight.
Can Ternary Bonsai 27B and Grok Build 0.1 understand images?+
Ternary Bonsai 27B is documented with image input; Grok Build 0.1 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Ternary Bonsai 27B is — and Grok Build 0.1 is —.
Do Ternary Bonsai 27B and Grok Build 0.1 support reasoning and tool use?+
Ternary Bonsai 27B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Grok Build 0.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1?+
Ternary Bonsai 27B has 1 sourced provider route; Grok Build 0.1 has 1, a tie.
Which offers better value, Ternary Bonsai 27B or Grok Build 0.1?+
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.