Grok Build 0.1 vs Qwen3-105B
Grok Build 0.1 (2026) and Qwen3-105B (2025) are agentic coding models from xAI and Alibaba. Grok Build 0.1 ships a 256K-token context window, while Qwen3-105B ships a 128k-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing. The goal is to make the tradeoff clear before deeper testing.
Grok Build 0.1 is safer overall; choose Qwen3-105B when provider fit matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3-105B |
|---|---|---|
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | RAG, Agents, and Long context |
| Context window | 256K | 128k |
| Cheapest output | $2/1M tokens | - |
| Provider routes | 1 tracked | 0 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Grok Build 0.1 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Grok Build 0.1 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Grok Build 0.1 uniquely exposes Reasoning and Structured outputs in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Grok Build 0.1 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3-105B for RAG, Agents, and Long context.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.
Grok Build 0.1
$1,300
Cheapest tracked route: xAI Console
Qwen3-105B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Grok Build 0.1 and Qwen3-105B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Reasoning and Structured outputs before moving production traffic.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Qwen3-105B and Grok Build 0.1; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Grok Build 0.1 adds Reasoning and Structured outputs in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-05-14 | 2025-12-15 |
| Context window | 256K | 128k |
| Parameters | — | 105B |
| Architecture | - | - |
| License | Proprietary | Open Source |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | 2025-02 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3-105B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $1/1M tokens | - |
| Output price | $2/1M tokens | - |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Capability | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen3-105B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | No |
| Multimodal | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | No |
| Code execution | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on reasoning mode: Grok Build 0.1 and structured outputs: Grok Build 0.1. Both models share function calling and tool use, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
Pricing coverage is uneven: Grok Build 0.1 has $1/1M input tokens and Qwen3-105B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 1 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Grok Build 0.1 when coding workflow support, larger context windows, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3-105B when provider fit are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency. For teams standardizing a stack, that distinction is often the difference between a benchmark win and a reliable deployment.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen3-105B?
Grok Build 0.1 supports 256K tokens, while Qwen3-105B supports 128k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Is Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen3-105B open source?
Grok Build 0.1 is listed under Proprietary. Qwen3-105B is listed under Open Source. 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 reasoning mode, Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen3-105B?
Grok Build 0.1 has the clearer documented reasoning mode signal in this comparison. If reasoning mode is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for function calling, Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen3-105B?
Both Grok Build 0.1 and Qwen3-105B expose function calling. 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 tool use, Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen3-105B?
Both Grok Build 0.1 and Qwen3-105B expose tool use. 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 Build 0.1 and Qwen3-105B?
Grok Build 0.1 is available on xAI Console. Qwen3-105B is available on the tracked providers still being sourced. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-20. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.