| Signal | Grok 4.20 Beta | Delta | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +17 | |
Pricing | 6 | +5 | |
Context window size | 100 | +14 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -60 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 5 | 1 wins |
13
days ranked higher
5
days
12
days ranked higher
xAI
Alibaba
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B saves you $418.75/month
That's $5025.00/year compared to Grok 4.20 Beta at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Grok 4.20 Beta | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 88 | 87 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Rank | #36 | #42 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Quality Rank | #36 | #42 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Adoption Rank | #36 | #42 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Parameters | -- | 35B | -- |
| Context Window | 2000K | 262K | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Pricing | $2.00/$6.00/M | $0.16/$1.30/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 83 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Pricing | 6 | 1 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Context window size | 100 | 86 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Grok 4.20 Beta |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 80 | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 88/100 (rank #36), placing it in the top 88% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 87/100 (rank #42), placing it in the top 86% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 1-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal — your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B offers 82% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $21.94/month with Qwen3.5-35B-A3B vs $120.00/month with Grok 4.20 Beta — a $98.06 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (2000K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($1.30/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (88/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input — can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Grok 4.20 Beta and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B are extremely close in overall performance (only 1.2999999999999972 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Grok 4.20 Beta
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
82% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Grok 4.20 Beta
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Grok 4.20 Beta
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Grok 4.20 Beta
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by xAI
| Capability | Grok 4.20 Beta | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
xAI
Alibaba
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B saves you $8.95/month
That's 83% cheaper than Grok 4.20 Beta at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Grok 4.20 Beta | Qwen3.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 2M | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | 65,536 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Mar 12, 2026 | Feb 25, 2026 |
Grok 4.20 Beta scores 88/100 (rank #36) compared to Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's 87/100 (rank #42), giving it a 1-point advantage. Grok 4.20 Beta is the stronger overall choice, though Qwen3.5-35B-A3B may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Grok 4.20 Beta is ranked #36 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is ranked #42 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is cheaper at $1.30/M output tokens vs Grok 4.20 Beta's $6.00/M output tokens — 4.6x more expensive. Input token pricing: Grok 4.20 Beta at $2.00/M vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B at $0.16/M.
Grok 4.20 Beta has a larger context window of 2,000,000 tokens compared to Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's 262,144 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.