Roboflow

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max

Compare Grok 4.5 and Qwen3.8 Max 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 Qwen3.8 Max 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.
QwenQwen3.8 Max
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max on Vision Evals

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 76.7% to 19.0%.

Overall, Grok 4.5 averages 65.8% (#40 of 59) against 83.9% (#6 of 59) for Qwen3.8 Max.

Qwen3.8 Max is both cheaper ($0.0074 vs $0.0084 per sample) and faster (17.3s vs 20.8s per sample).

Grok 4.5Qwen3.8 Max

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max Comparison Table

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

PropertyGrok 4.5Qwen3.8 Max
OrganizationSpaceXAIQwen
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Aug 2026
Context Window500K984K
Parameters2.4T total, ~95B active
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00
Output $/1M$6.00
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%
83.9%
Avg cost / sample$0.0084$0.0074
Avg speed / sample20.75s17.25s
By task
Object Detection (low)
19.0%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 18.0 to 19.6
$0.011
76.7%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.1
$0.012
Object Detection (high)
17.8%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 17.5 to 18.0
$0.020
78.4%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 78.9
$0.030
Counting (low)
59.5%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 62.2
$0.0065
81.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4
$0.0046
Counting (high)
57.7%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 60.8
$0.012
81.1%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 81.1
$0.0091
Identification (low)
83.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0046
88.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0027
Identification (high)
85.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0067
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0037
OCR (low)
92.1%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.5
$0.0068
93.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.8 to 93.9
$0.0056
OCR (high)
92.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 92.9
$0.012
91.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 91.7
$0.027
Data Extraction (low)
83.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 84.5
$0.0044
87.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.6 to 87.6
$0.0029
Data Extraction (high)
81.8%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 83.5
$0.0061
89.3%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.7 to 90.7
$0.0040
Reasoning (low)
57.6%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 58.9
$0.0082
75.9%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 77.5
$0.0048
Reasoning (high)
59.8%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.0 to 62.3
$0.019
80.3%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.2 to 82.1
$0.011

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max: 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.

Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the flagship tier of Alibaba's Qwen3.8 family, a sparse mixture-of-experts multimodal model with roughly 2.4 trillion total parameters of which about 95 billion activate per token, which keeps serving cost and latency well below what the total parameter count would imply. It builds on the architectural foundation established by Qwen3.5 and accepts text, images, video, and documents as input while producing text output. Reported context handling reaches close to one million tokens, with a maximum generation length of 131,072 tokens, so the model is aimed at long-horizon agentic work such as repository-scale coding, multi-step research, data analysis, and office document workflows.

For vision work the model performs image and video understanding, document and chart interpretation, text recognition inside images, and grounded visual question answering, and Alibaba reports gains concentrated in multimodal and agentic evaluation categories rather than general reasoning. Published figures include 86.6 on Terminal-Bench 2.1, 67.7 on SWE-bench Pro, 93.0 on PaperBench, 82.8 on IFBench, and 92.6 on GPQA Diamond. It is the first model in the Max tier of the Qwen line for which the team states weights will be released publicly, alongside a smaller Qwen3.8 27B checkpoint. No training or safety model card has been published.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Qwen3.8 Max performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 83.9% (#6 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, Qwen3.8 Max leads with 76.7% against 19.0%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0074 per sample against $0.0084. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Qwen3.8 Max is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 17.3s per inference against 20.8s. 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.