Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Compare Grok 4.6 and Qwen3.7 Plus side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.
Compare Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Plus 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Plus on Vision Evals
Grok 4.6 scores higher on 3 of the five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 60.1% to 23.8%.
Overall, Grok 4.6 averages 59.1% (#36 of 63) against 58.9% (#37 of 63) for Qwen3.7 Plus.
Qwen3.7 Plus is both cheaper ($0.0008 vs $0.011 per sample) and faster (7.8s vs 19.3s per sample).
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Plus Comparison Table
Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 13, 2026
| Property | Grok 4.6 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | SpaceXAI | Qwen |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | — |
| Release Date | Aug 2026 | Jun 2026 |
| Context Window | 500K | — |
| Parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Proprietary | Unknown |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | See license terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $0.320 |
| Output $/1M | $6.00 | $1.28 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Not listed |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Not listed |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Not listed |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Not listed |
| Vision Language | Supported | Not listed |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Not listed |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Not listed |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Not listed |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 59.1% | 58.9% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.011 | $0.0008 |
| Avg speed / sample | 19.32s | 7.77s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 23.8% ±2.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 20.2 to 25.9 | 60.1% |
| Object Detection (high) | 24.0% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 23.1 to 25.1 | – |
| Counting (low) | 65.8% ±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 70.3 | 50.0% |
| Counting (high) | 56.8% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 58.1 | – |
| Identification (low) | 84.4% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5 | 84.4% |
| Identification (high) | 85.4% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5 | – |
| OCR (low) | 60.6% | 60.3% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 61.2% | 65.5% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 61.1% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.6 to 62.3 | 39.7% |
| Reasoning (high) | 63.8% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.3 to 66.2 | 68.2% |
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Plus: Overview
Grok 4.6 is a proprietary reasoning model from xAI aimed at long-running agentic workflows, coding, and knowledge work. It accepts text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window and a knowledge cutoff of February 1, 2026. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning budget with low, medium, high, and xhigh settings, where high is the default, and it supports function calling, structured outputs, web and X search, and code execution as documented tool behaviors. Its visual capability covers interpreting images supplied alongside text prompts, which places it in the visual question answering and document understanding family, and it can also return object detection boxes as text coordinates when prompted.
xAI characterizes Grok 4.6 as the result of an extended post-training run over the Grok 4.5 lineage rather than a new pretrained base. The described recipe combines curated model-generated reasoning and technical data, engineering data, a revised optimizer, regenerated supervised fine-tuning trajectories, and reinforcement learning across agent environments spanning knowledge work, coding, kernel optimization, web development, and computer-aided design. Parameter count and architecture specifics are not disclosed. Independent measurement from Artificial Analysis places the model at 61 on its Intelligence Index, five points above Grok 4.5.