Grok 4.20 vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B leads Grok 4.20 on coding, 36.8 to 33.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, at about the same output price ($2.70 vs $2.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 17 benchmarks have a result for both.
Grok 4.20 or Qwen3.6 27B: which to pick
Pick Qwen3.6 27B for coding: it scores 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.3 for Grok 4.20.
Pick Grok 4.20 for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($2.50 vs $2.70 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.72 against $1.30).
- Shared results
- 17
- Grok 4.20 only
- 38
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 7
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B scores 36.8 against 33.3.
2 benchmarks behind each score
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Grok 4.20
Grok 4.20 leads, 25.7 against 21.4.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.6 27B has a AA Agentic Index result, 18.5.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Grok 4.20 has a GPQA Diamond result, 88.6%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Grok 4.20 has a AIME result, 96.5%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Grok 4.20 has a MMLU Pro result, 86.3%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Grok 4.20 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1229.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Grok 4.20
Grok 4.20 takes 2M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B
Grok 4.20 $0.0025, Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
Grok 4.20
Grok 4.20 $0.72, Qwen3.6 27B $1.30.
Published attempt cost and pass rate
At a glance
- Coding index
- Grok 4.20 33.3 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Reasoning, 9.2 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- MortgageTax (Vals AI): Grok 4.20 45.4% against Qwen3.6 27B 68.3%, 22.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Grok 4.20 $2.50 against Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
- Context window
- Grok 4.20 takes 2M tokens, Qwen3.6 27B 262K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Grok 4.20 | Bars | Qwen3.6 27B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 3 | 1 | ||
| General | 3 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 12 | 5 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index21
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 53.7 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 84.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 72.2% | 70.0% | Grok 4.20 |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 4.1% | 11.9% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 0.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 44.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 42.8% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 37.9% | 34.8% | Grok 4.20 |
| Terminal-Bench | 57.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| WeirdML | 52.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 25.7 | 21.4 | Grok 4.20 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.1 | 146.2 | Grok 4.20 |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 18.5 | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | 1144 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | 1054 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1090 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | 1045 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | 1089 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | 1180 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 28.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 13.9% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 11.7% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 93.0% | 94.2% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $4,663 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 88.6% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 83.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 91.1% | 84.2% | Grok 4.20 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 34.5% | 23.1% | Grok 4.20 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 85.9% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| ARC-AGI | 89.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.1% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 7.0% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75.0% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 96.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 91.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 35.1% | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 86.3% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 77.7% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 54.4% | 53.2% | Grok 4.20 |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 63.7% | 62.3% | Grok 4.20 |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 74.1% | 71.3% | Grok 4.20 |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 45.4% | 68.3% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 94.5% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 32.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1229 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1200 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1193 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1217 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1193 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1221 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1165 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1175 | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 38.2% | 45.6% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 63.4% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Vals Multimodal Index | 39.1% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| IFBench | 81.2% | 67.6% | Grok 4.20 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 69.0% | 77.3% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| DTBench | 90.1% | 78.1% | Grok 4.20 |
| LMCA | 38.7% | 34.5% | Grok 4.20 |
| CL-bench | 22.2% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| CL-bench Life | 11.9% | Not measured | Only Grok 4.20 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.6 27B costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | SpaceXAI Grok 4.20 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | xAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | March 31, 2026 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 2M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.25 | $0.45 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.50 | $2.70 |
| Coding index | 33.3 | 36.8 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.72 | $1.30 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Grok 4.20 better than Qwen3.6 27B for coding?
Pick Qwen3.6 27B for coding: it scores 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.3 for Grok 4.20. Pick Grok 4.20 for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($2.50 vs $2.70 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.72 against $1.30).
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 or Qwen3.6 27B?
Grok 4.20 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 and $2.70. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Grok 4.20 costs $0.72 and Qwen3.6 27B $1.30.
Which has the bigger context window, Grok 4.20 or Qwen3.6 27B?
Grok 4.20, with 2M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Grok 4.20 vs Qwen3.6 27B comparison based on?
17 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Grok 4.20's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.6 27B's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.