Model comparison
Grok 4.5 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 Coder Next in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.1 to 22.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 54.1% for Grok 4.5 and 32.3% for Qwen3 Coder Next.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.5.
- Grok 4.5 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3 Coder Next has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 55.0 | 34.3 |
| Released | 2026-07-08 | 2026-02-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 500K | 262K |
| Max output | 500K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.12 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35), Qwen3 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 54.1% | 32.3% |
| WeirdML | 46.4% | 34.4% |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1553 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1474 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,309 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 56.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 47.9% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 23.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.4% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1213 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,887 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 15.4% | 0% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 52.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 70% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 36% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | — |
| DTBench | 96.5% | — |
| LMCA | 45.2% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 74.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.92 | — |
Math Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 24.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1459 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1466 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 27.3% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1496 | — |
| LMArena French | 1456 | — |
| LMArena German | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1428 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1450 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1446 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1579 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.5 better than Qwen3 Coder Next?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.5 or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Grok 4.5 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Grok 4.5 or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.5 does, with 500K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Qwen3 Coder Next share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.