Roboflow

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B

Compare Grok 4.5 and Qwen3.5-27B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.

Compare Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GrokGrok 4.5
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.5-27B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B on Vision Evals

Qwen3.5-27B scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Qwen3.5-27B leads 50.5% to 19.0%.

Overall, Grok 4.5 averages 65.8% (#40 of 59) against 70.8% (#26 of 59) for Qwen3.5-27B.

Qwen3.5-27B is cheaper ($0.0043 vs $0.0084 per sample), while Grok 4.5 is faster (20.8s vs 80.4s per sample).

Grok 4.5Qwen3.5-27B

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B Comparison Table

Evals updated September 27, 2026Pricing updated September 27, 2026

PropertyGrok 4.5Qwen3.5-27B
OrganizationSpaceXAIQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Feb 2026
Context Window500K262K
Parameters27B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$0.195
Output $/1M$6.00$1.56
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
65.8%
70.8%
Quantizationsself-hosted
BF1670.8%FP868.2%AWQ-INT469.3%hardware →
Avg cost / sample$0.0084$0.0043
Avg speed / sample20.75s80.37s
By task
Object Detection (low)
19.0%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 18.0 to 19.6
$0.011
50.5%
±3.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 46.1 to 53.0
$0
Object Detection (high)
17.8%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 17.5 to 18.0
$0.020
–
Counting (low)
59.5%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 62.2
$0.0065
67.6%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.2 to 68.9
$0
Counting (high)
57.7%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 60.8
$0.012
–
Identification (low)
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0046
80.2%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 84.4
$0
Identification (high)
85.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0067
–
OCR (low)
92.1%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.5
$0.0068
84.7%
±3.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.8 to 87.3
$0
OCR (high)
92.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.9
$0.012
–
Data Extraction (low)
83.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 84.5
$0.0044
83.8%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.5 to 85.6
$0
Data Extraction (high)
81.8%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 83.5
$0.0061
–
Reasoning (low)
57.6%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 58.9
$0.0082
58.1%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 60.3
$0
Reasoning (high)
59.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.0 to 62.3
$0.019
–

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-27B: Overview

Grok 4.5

Grok 4.5 is a proprietary reasoning model from SpaceXAI (xAI) that accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window. xAI positions it as a model for coding, agentic software work, and knowledge tasks, and states it was trained in the company's Memphis data centers on datasets spanning science, engineering, and mathematics. Its reinforcement learning stage covers hundreds of thousands of multi step software engineering tasks scored by automated checks and model based grading, and training is reported to have run on tens of thousands of NVIDIA GB300 GPUs using an asynchronous scheme in which multi hour agentic rollouts continue while learning proceeds in parallel, targeting long horizon autonomous operation rather than single turn inference.

For vision, the model consumes JPEG and PNG images in any order relative to text prompts, covering visual question answering, description of chart and document imagery, and reading text rendered inside a scene. Reasoning effort is configurable, and the model supports function calling and structured outputs, so image inputs can be interleaved with tool calls inside agent loops. xAI has not published a technical report, architecture details, or parameter count, and reported mixture of experts sizing figures come from secondary coverage rather than official documentation.

Qwen3.5-27B

Qwen3.5-27B is a multimodal dense hybrid model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team and released in February 2026 as a high-precision entry in the Qwen3.5 "Medium" series. Unlike its Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) siblings, the 27B model utilizes a dense architecture combining Gated Delta Networks with a feed-forward structure, activating its full parameter suite for every inference to maximize reliability. This design provides the highest instruction-following and coding accuracy in its class, with a notable IFEval score of 95.0. The model features a native 262K-token context window, extensible to 1M tokens via YaRN (RoPE scaling), and is released under the Apache-2.0 license.

Optimized for agentic workflows, Qwen3.5-27B employs an early-fusion architecture that treats visual and textual data as a unified stream for deep cross-modal reasoning. This unified approach allows the model to excel in technical analysis and software engineering, matching GPT-5-mini with a 72.4% score on SWE-bench Verified. While the larger MoE variants in the family lead in raw knowledge benchmarks, the 27B model offers a stable and high-density alternative for structured data extraction and spatial perception, contributing to the Qwen3.5 family’s generational leap in OCR accuracy over the previous Qwen3-VL series.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Qwen3.5-27B performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 70.8% (#26 of 59) against 65.8% (#40 of 59) for Grok 4.5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Qwen3.5-27B leads with 50.5% against 19.0%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Qwen3.5-27B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0043 per sample against $0.0084. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Grok 4.5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 20.8s per inference against 80.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.