Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Grok Build 0.1 0616 | Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $1 | $0.25 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $2 | $2 |
Verdict. Grok Build 0.1 0616 wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.
Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. Grok Build 0.1 0616 is strongest on Coding Index (51.5), Intelligence Index (40.7). Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) leads on Intelligence Index (29.9).
Speed. On throughput, Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) generates tokens at 152 tok/s versus 66 tok/s — about 56% faster. On time-to-first-token, Grok Build 0.1 0616 responds in 500ms vs 2050ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.
Provider. SpaceXAI and Alibaba sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: SpaceXAI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Alibaba 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): Grok Build 0.1 0616 costs $60.00 ($720/year); Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) costs $37.50 ($450/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Grok Build 0.1 0616 ≈ $9.00/run, Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) ≈ $5.25/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Grok Build 0.1 0616 ≈ $400/run, Qwen3.5 35B A3B (Reasoning) ≈ $250/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 152 tok/s vs 66 tok/s. Grok Build 0.1 0616 also has lower time-to-first-token (0.50s vs 2.05s).
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.