ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 27B

Too close to call on our weighted score (Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 67, Qwen3.8 27B 66). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. xAI

    Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)

    Released Mar 9, 2026

    67/100
    • ECI152.3
    • Price$1.25 / $2.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 27B

    Released Aug 14, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI151.8
    • Price$0.40 / $2.55
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 27B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 67/100, Qwen3.8 27B 66/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) for raw capability and Qwen3.8 27B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Capabilities Index (ECI): Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 152.3 · Qwen3.8 27B 151.8
  • Lowest priceQwen3.8 27BQwen3.8 27B $0.938 · Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) $1.56 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 1,000,000 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsGrok 4.20 (Reasoning): Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3.8 27BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Qwen3.8 27B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7979
Price25%3949
Inputs & features15%8070
Context window10%6037
Overall100%67/10066/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 27B specifications side by side
SpecificationGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)xAIQwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)152.3 (best)151.8
ECI rank#51 of 165 (best)#54 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions89.3%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics92.2%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions30.2%—
Price per million tokens
Input$1.25$0.40 (best)
Output$2.50 (best)$2.55
Cached input$0.20—
Blended (3:1)$1.56$0.938 (best)
Long-context rateOver 200K: $2.50 / $5.00Same rate
Price sourceOfficial xAI APIMedian of 49 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output30,000 tokens32,768 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDgrok-4.20-0309-reasoning—
API providers1553 (best)
ReleasedMar 9, 2026Aug 14, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)$17.50
  • Qwen3.8 27B$9.10
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.8 27B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 67/100, Qwen3.8 27B 66/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) for raw capability and Qwen3.8 27B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper at $0.40 input / $2.55 output per million tokens (median across 49 API providers). Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) costs $1.25 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official xAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.938 per million tokens for Qwen3.8 27B versus $1.56 for Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) (1.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 152.3 (#51 of 165) and Qwen3.8 27B 151.8 (#54 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (149.5–154.7 vs 149.9–153.6), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) and Qwen3.8 27B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) up to 30,000, Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.8 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.8 27B is the newest, released Aug 14, 2026. Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) came out Mar 9, 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons