ai-trend-notifier

$ diff gemini-3-6-flash grok-build

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Grok Build

Google DeepMind and xAI, side by side. Every value below is the one recorded on the model’s own wiki page, with its citation — nothing is estimated.

What actually differs

Context window
Gemini 3.6 Flash takes 1.0M against 256K — 4.1× more room in a single request.
Input price
Grok Build at $1/M against $1.5/M — 1.5× cheaper to feed.
Output price
Grok Build at $2/M against $7.5/M — 3.8× cheaper to generate. Output dominates the bill on most agentic workloads, where the model writes far more than it reads.
Weights
Grok Build publishes weights (Apache 2.0 (CLI codebase, open-sourced 2026-07-16)); Gemini 3.6 Flash is API-only. That decides self-hosting, air-gapped deployment and fine-tuning before any capability question does.
Recency
Gemini 3.6 Flash shipped 68 days after Grok Build (2026-07-21 vs 2026-05-14).

Full spec

AttributeGemini 3.6 FlashGrok Build
DeveloperGoogle DeepMindxAI
Released2026-07-212026-05-14
Context window1,048,576 tokens (1M)256K tokens
Pricing$1.50/M input · $7.50/M output$1/M input · $2/M output (xAI API public beta)
LicenseproprietaryApache 2.0 (CLI codebase, open-sourced 2026-07-16)
AvailabilityGemini API, Google AI Studio, Android Studio, Vertex AI, consumer Gemini app, Google Search, GitHub CopilotTerminal CLI (SuperGrok Heavy), Kilo Code VS Code/JetBrains (SuperGrok or X Premium+), xAI API public beta; source at github.com/xai-org/grok-build

Values come from Gemini 3.6 Flash and Grok Build, where each is cited to its source. This page states no benchmark result and ranks neither model — it puts two published specifications next to each other. Where a lab has not published a figure, the row says so rather than guessing. How these pages are produced.

← all comparisons