Grok-3 vs Qwen3.5-27B
Grok-3 (2025) and Qwen3.5-27B (2026) are frontier-tier reasoning models from xAI and Alibaba. Grok-3 ships a 131k-token context window, while Qwen3.5-27B ships a 262k-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Qwen3.5-27B leads by 6.2 pts. On pricing, Qwen3.5-27B costs $0.20/1M input tokens versus $0.80/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
Qwen3.5-27B is ~310% cheaper at $0.20/1M; pay for Grok-3 only for vision-heavy evaluation.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Grok-3 | Qwen3.5-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 131k | 262k |
| Cheapest output | $2.40/1M tokens | $1.56/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 4 tracked | 4 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 3 rows | MMLU PRO leader |
Decision tradeoffs
- Local decision data tags Grok-3 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Qwen3.5-27B holds a shared-benchmark lead on MMLU PRO, ahead by 6.2 points.
- Qwen3.5-27B has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Qwen3.5-27B has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $1.56/1M tokens.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3.5-27B for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Grok-3
$1,240
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Chutes AI
Qwen3.5-27B
$546
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $694. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Qwen3.5-27B is $0.84/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Grok-3 is $0.84/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2025-02-17 | 2026-02-24 |
| Context window | 131k | 262k |
| Parameters | — | 27B |
| Architecture | - | decoder only |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0(OSI) |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Commercial use | Commercial use with conditions | Commercial use allowed |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-04 | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Grok-3 | Qwen3.5-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.80/1M tokens | $0.20/1M tokens |
| Output price | $2.40/1M tokens | $1.56/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Grok-3 | Qwen3.5-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | No | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok-3 | Qwen3.5-27B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU PRO | 79.9 | 86.1 |
| Google-Proof Q&A | 84.6 | 85.8 |
| LiveCodeBench | 79.4 | 80.7 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Grok-3 at 79.9 and Qwen3.5-27B at 86.1, with Qwen3.5-27B ahead by 6.2 points; Google-Proof Q&A has Grok-3 at 84.6 and Qwen3.5-27B at 85.8, with Qwen3.5-27B ahead by 1.2 points; LiveCodeBench has Grok-3 at 79.4 and Qwen3.5-27B at 80.7, with Qwen3.5-27B ahead by 1.3 points. The largest visible gap is 6.2 points on MMLU PRO, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint is close: both models cover vision, multimodal input, reasoning mode, function calling, and tool use. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.
For cost, Grok-3 lists $0.80/1M input and $2.40/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while Qwen3.5-27B lists $0.20/1M input and $1.56/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Qwen3.5-27B lower by about $0.68 per million blended tokens. Availability is 4 providers versus 4, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Grok-3 when vision-heavy evaluation are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3.5-27B when long-context analysis, larger context windows, and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Grok-3 or Qwen3.5-27B?
Qwen3.5-27B supports 262k tokens, while Grok-3 supports 131k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is cheaper, Grok-3 or Qwen3.5-27B?
Qwen3.5-27B is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Grok-3 costs $0.80/1M input and $2.40/1M output tokens. Qwen3.5-27B costs $0.20/1M input and $1.56/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Grok-3 or Qwen3.5-27B open source?
Grok-3 is listed under Proprietary. Qwen3.5-27B is listed under Apache 2.0. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Grok-3 or Qwen3.5-27B?
Both Grok-3 and Qwen3.5-27B expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for multimodal input, Grok-3 or Qwen3.5-27B?
Both Grok-3 and Qwen3.5-27B expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Where can I run Grok-3 and Qwen3.5-27B?
Grok-3 is available on OpenRouter, xAI Console, Chutes AI, and Microsoft Foundry. Qwen3.5-27B is available on DeepInfra, OpenRouter, Alibaba Cloud PAI-EAS, and Novita AI. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-22. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.