Model comparison
Claude 2.1 vs Grok 4.1 Fast
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.1 Fast in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 43.4 to 21.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 51% for Claude 2.1 and 87.7% for Grok 4.1 Fast.
Side by side
| Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 41.4 |
| Released | 2023-11-21 | 2025-06-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.50 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1242 |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1411 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 394.93 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 69.6% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 13.1% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1171 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 1,107 |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), Grok 4.1 Fast: 43.4 (#49)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51% | 87.7% |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | 61 |
| SimpleBench | — | 56% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 87.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1407 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | — |
Math Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 60.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1408 |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 17.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1399 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1201 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1391 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1441 |
| LMArena French | — | 1415 |
| LMArena German | — | 1404 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1349 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1361 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1413 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1376 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1390 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Grok 4.1 Fast |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1408 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1394 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1327 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1389 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2.1 better than Grok 4.1 Fast?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 2.1 or Grok 4.1 Fast better for coding?
Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Grok 4.1 Fast share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.1 Fast has 32.