Side-by-side comparison
Qwen3.6 27B vs Grok 4.20
| Qwen3.6 27B | Grok 4.20 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Qwen | xAI |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 262,144 | 2,000,000 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | vision, tools, json_mode | vision, tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.3200 | 1.2500 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 3.2000 | 2.5000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 27B or Grok 4.20?
Qwen3.6 27B is cheaper than Grok 4.20 on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.115 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.6 27B or Grok 4.20?
Grok 4.20 has the larger context window at 2M tokens versus 262k tokens for Qwen3.6 27B. That means Grok 4.20 can ingest about 7.6x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Qwen3.6 27B and Grok 4.20?
Qwen3.6 27B comes from Qwen; Grok 4.20 comes from xAI. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.