Verified November 2026

Home › Compare › Grok 4.6 vs Qwen 3 235B

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen 3 235B

A straight cost comparison of Grok 4.6 (xAI Grok) and Qwen 3 235B (Alibaba (Qwen)), per 1,000,000 tokens, verified November 2026.

$2Grok 4.6 input / 1M
$0.50Qwen 3 235B input / 1M
71%Blended price gap
Qwen 3 235BCheaper blended

Rate-by-rate comparison

USD per 1M tokens · November 2026
MetricGrok 4.6Qwen 3 235BWinner
Input / 1M$2$0.50Qwen 3 235B
Cached input / 1M$0.50$0.05Qwen 3 235B
Cache write / 1M——Tie
Output / 1M$6$2Qwen 3 235B
Context window500,000131,072Grok 4.6
Batch APIYesYesTie
Long-context tier> 200,000None—

For per-token metrics, the lower number wins. For context window and batch support, the higher or broader option wins. A dash means the provider does not publish that rate: a missing cache-write fee means writes are not billed per token, while a missing cached-input rate means cache hits bill at the full input rate.

Blended cost: 1M input + 250K output

ModelBlended costDifference
Grok 4.6$3.50+$2.50
Qwen 3 235B$1Cheaper

Ten workloads, two bills

The same two models, priced across ten workloads that differ only in their input:output ratio. Nothing else changes — no retries, no system prompt, no middleware.

WorkloadGrok 4.6Qwen 3 235BWinner
Classification
100K reqs · 500 in / 10 out
$106$27Qwen 3 235B
Data extraction
10K reqs · 2K in / 200 out
$52$14Qwen 3 235B
Support chat
1K reqs · 4K in / 600 out
$11.60$3.20Qwen 3 235B
Code review
2K reqs · 8K in / 1.5K out
$50$14Qwen 3 235B
Summarisation
1K reqs · 20K in / 1K out
$46$12Qwen 3 235B
Agent loop
5K reqs · 12K in / 2K out
$180$50Qwen 3 235B
Translation
500 reqs · 15K in / 15K out
$60$18.75Qwen 3 235B
Long-document QA
200 reqs · 120K in / 800 out
$48.96$12.32Qwen 3 235B
Cached RAG
1K reqs · 50K in (45K cached) / 1K out
$38.57$6.77Qwen 3 235B
Nightly batch
10K reqs · 10K in / 2K out
$160$45Qwen 3 235B

Grok 4.6 wins 0 of 10, Qwen 3 235B wins 10 of 10. The winner is set by the token mix, not by the headline rate.

Where the two bills cross over

Qwen 3 235B is cheaper on both sides of the mix: $0.50 vs $2 per million input tokens, and $2 vs $6 per million output. No input:output ratio reverses that, so on price alone the other model never becomes the better choice — it has to win on context, latency or output quality.

Cost at four scales

The same support-chat workload (4K input, 600 output per request) at four monthly volumes.

Requests / monthGrok 4.6Qwen 3 235BDifference
100$1.16$0.32Qwen 3 235B cheaper by $0.84
1,000$11.60$3.20Qwen 3 235B cheaper by $8.40
10,000$116$32Qwen 3 235B cheaper by $84
100,000$1,160$320Qwen 3 235B cheaper by $840

What caching does to each bill

Caching only helps the part of the prompt that repeats. This is the support-chat workload (1,000 requests, 4,000 input tokens each) with an increasing share of that prompt served from a warm cache, written once on the first request.

Cached share of the promptGrok 4.6Qwen 3 235BWinner
0%$11.60$3.20Qwen 3 235B
50%$8.60$2.30Qwen 3 235B
80%$6.80$1.76Qwen 3 235B
95%$5.91$1.49Qwen 3 235B

Both models publish a cached-read rate, so the discount is comparable: Grok 4.6 reads cache at $0.50 per million, Qwen 3 235B at $0.05.

Which one should you pick?

Grok 4.6 wins on none of the ten workloads above, while Qwen 3 235B wins on classification, data extraction, support chat, code review, summarisation, agent loop, translation, long-document qa, cached rag, nightly batch.

Beyond price, the two differ on input rate ($2 vs $0.50); output rate ($6 vs $2); cached-input rate ($0.50 vs $0.05); context window (500,000 vs 131,072); long-context tier (yes, above 200,000 vs none).

Batch mode is available on Grok 4.6 and Qwen 3 235B, which halves the nightly job. Both publish cached-input discounts, so a stable system prompt is worth caching on either.

FAQ

Is Grok 4.6 cheaper than Qwen 3 235B?

On a blended 1M-input-plus-250K-output workload, Qwen 3 235B is cheaper by 71% ($1 vs $3.50). The gap changes for cache-heavy prompts and for batch jobs, as the workload table shows.

Which handles longer prompts, Grok 4.6 or Qwen 3 235B?

Grok 4.6 has the larger context window (500,000 vs 131,072 tokens). Watch the long-context threshold on Grok 4.6: rates rise once input passes it.

Do both models support prompt caching?

Grok 4.6 bills cached reads at $0.50 per 1M; Qwen 3 235B at $0.05.

Related comparisons

Run your own token volumes