Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) | Grok Build 0.1 0616 |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.25 | $1 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $2 | $2 |
Verdict. Grok Build 0.1 0616 takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.
Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Grok Build 0.1 0616 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Grok Build 0.1 0616 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) is strongest on Intelligence Index (19.3). Grok Build 0.1 0616 leads on Coding Index (51.5), Intelligence Index (27.2).
Speed. On throughput, Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) generates tokens at 148 tok/s versus 59 tok/s — about 60% faster. On time-to-first-token, Grok Build 0.1 0616 responds in 600ms vs 2040ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.
Provider. Alibaba and SpaceXAI sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Alibaba tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while SpaceXAI often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) costs $37.50 ($450/year); Grok Build 0.1 0616 costs $60.00 ($720/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) ≈ $5.25/run, Grok Build 0.1 0616 ≈ $9.00/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) ≈ $250/run, Grok Build 0.1 0616 ≈ $400/run. Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Head-to-head deltas
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.69/M tokens vs $1.25/M for Grok Build 0.1 0616.
Grok Build 0.1 0616 wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) generates tokens faster at 148 tok/s vs 59 tok/s. However, Grok Build 0.1 0616 has lower time-to-first-token (0.60s vs 2.04s).
Choose based on your priorities: Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) for lower cost, Grok Build 0.1 0616 for stronger benchmark performance, and Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.