Roboflow

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Compare Grok 4.6 and Qwen3.8 27B side-by-side.

Compare Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 27B live

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

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 27B on Vision Evals

Grok 4.6 scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where Qwen3.8 27B leads 54.5% to 20.2%.

Overall, Grok 4.6 averages 67.8% (#17 of 30) against 61.2% (#29 of 30) for Qwen3.8 27B.

Qwen3.8 27B is both cheaper ($0.0018 vs $0.0069 per sample) and faster (7.3s vs 7.4s per sample).

Grok 4.6Qwen3.8 27B

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 27B Comparison Table

Evals updated August 14, 2026Pricing updated August 15, 2026

PropertyGrok 4.6Qwen3.8 27B
OrganizationSpaceXAIQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateAug 2026Aug 2026
Context Window500K262K
Parameters27.78B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$0.450
Output $/1M$6.00$3.20
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
67.8%
61.2%
Avg cost / sample$0.0069$0.0018
Avg speed / sample7.39s7.33s
By task
Object Detection
20.2%
$0.0068
54.5%
$0.0036
Counting
70.3%
$0.0074
41.9%
$0.0005
Identification
78.1%
$0.0048
78.1%
$0.0005
OCR
92.0%
$0.0086
81.4%
$0.0019
Data Extraction
84.5%
$0.0042
79.4%
$0.0005
Reasoning (low)
61.6%
$0.0087
31.8%
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
61.6%
$0.027
62.3%
$0.0087

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 27B: Overview

Grok 4.6

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 rather than producing pixel level outputs such as boxes or masks.

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.

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8-27B is a dense vision-language model of roughly 27.78 billion parameters from Alibaba's Qwen team, built on the architectural foundation established by the Qwen3.5 generation. It takes interleaved text, image, and video input through an integrated vision encoder and produces text, covering document and chart understanding, visual question answering, front-end code generation from visual references, and agentic computer-use workflows. The decoder is a hybrid stack of 64 layers that repeats a pattern of three Gated DeltaNet linear-attention blocks, each followed by a feed-forward block, then one grouped-query full-attention block, so only a quarter of the layers maintain a conventional key-value cache. Native context length is 262,144 tokens.

Post-training targets long-horizon agentic work, and the model exposes per-request thinking control that lets callers switch reasoning traces on or off and choose a reasoning effort level. Multi-token prediction weights are trained alongside the main network for speculative decoding. Qwen reports improvements over Qwen3.6-27B on agentic and multimodal evaluations including Terminal-Bench 2.1, OSWorld-Verified, and SWE-bench Multimodal, with additional results on MathVision, CharXiv, and an internal Vision2Web suite.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Grok 4.6 performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 67.8% (#17 of 30) against 61.2% (#29 of 30) for Qwen3.8 27B. 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, Qwen3.8 27B leads with 54.5% against 20.2%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0018 per sample against $0.0069. Grok 4.6 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $6.00 per 1M output; Qwen3.8 27B is priced at $0.45 per 1M input tokens and $3.20 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Qwen3.8 27B is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.3s per inference against 7.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.