Model comparison

Grok 4.1 Fast vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.1 Fast's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.1 Fast xAI

40.9

Rank #131 Confirmed

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Meta

30.3

Rank #283 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 9 categories and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 42.3 to 13.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 69.6% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 31.9% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.32 per million input/output tokens, against $0.20 / $0.50 for Grok 4.1 Fast.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.1 Fast and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct specifications
Grok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index40.930.3
Released2025-06-272024-12-06
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window128K128K
Max output30K4K
Input $ / M tokens$0.20$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$0.32
Results tracked3243

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.8 (#236), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#284)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Coding14111268
LMArena WebDev1241—
SciCode—26%
WeirdML—14.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.9%
LiveBench Coding—36.6%
BigCodeBench Complete—57.5%
ALE-Bench394.93—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.6 (#100)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard69.6%31.9%
τ²-bench Banking13.1%—
BALROG—23%
LMArena Search1171—
Vending-Bench 21,107—

Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.3 (#45), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 13.7 (#325)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
SimpleBench56%19.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts14071257
DTBench87.7%59.5%
ForecastBench6158.6
NYT Connections (extended)87.4%—
CritPt—0%
LiveBench Reasoning—50.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.5%
LMCA—17.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index—127.32
LiveBench—50.2%

Math Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.3 (#292)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Math14081268
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions60.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—5.1%
ProofBench4%—
LiveBench Math—42.2%
MATH Level 5—41.6%

Knowledge Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.5 (#220)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
Vectara Hallucination Rate17.8%4.1%
LMArena Expert13981225
GPQA Diamond—47.4%
Confabulations—22.8%
MMLU—86.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Vision1201—

Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 40.1 (#215)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Non-English13911236
LMArena Chinese14411217
LMArena French14161280
LMArena German14041251
LMArena Japanese13471149
LMArena Korean13611142
LMArena Russian13871252
LMArena Spanish14111269

Instruction Following Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.3 (#152)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following13761242
LiveBench Instruction Following—82.7%

Long Context Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#290)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Longer Query13901256
Fiction.LiveBench—33.3%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.8 (#203)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Text14081274
LMArena Creative Writing13941250
LMArena Multi-Turn13891279
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1327—
LiveBench Language—39.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.1 Fast's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.32 per million output tokens; Grok 4.1 Fast lists at $0.20 and $0.50.

Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better for coding?

Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.8 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 128K tokens.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper