Model comparison
Grok 4.1 Fast vs Llama 4 Maverick
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 4 Maverick in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 42.3 to 10.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 87.4% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 8% for Llama 4 Maverick.
- Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $0.65 for Llama 4 Maverick.
- Llama 4 Maverick has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 30.6 |
| Released | 2025-06-27 | 2025-04-05 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 128K |
| Max output | 30K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.19 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.65 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 54 |
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 4 Maverick: 26.3 (#318)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | 1302 |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | 172.97 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 21% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 15.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1241 | — |
| SciCode | — | 33.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 24.5% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49.7% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 61.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35), Llama 4 Maverick: 27.9 (#86)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | 37.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.3 (#45), Llama 4 Maverick: 10.1 (#337)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 56% | 27.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | 8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1281 |
| DTBench | 87.7% | 61.9% |
| ForecastBench | 61 | 57.5 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 55.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 4.4% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.6% |
| LMCA | — | 15.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.2 |
Math Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201), Llama 4 Maverick: 24.6 (#256)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1408 | 1299 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 20.6% |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 42.2% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 73% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0.7% |
Knowledge Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203), Llama 4 Maverick: 33.3 (#196)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | 8.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1398 | 1259 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 67% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 5.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 81% |
| Confabulations | — | 22.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 65% |
Multimodal Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71), Llama 4 Maverick: 30.9 (#100)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | 1141 |
| GeoBench | — | 52% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 31.8% |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110), Llama 4 Maverick: 42.4 (#190)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1269 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1277 |
| LMArena French | 1416 | 1258 |
| LMArena German | 1404 | 1291 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1347 | 1207 |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | 1203 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1286 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | 1293 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127), Llama 4 Maverick: 71.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1267 |
| IFEval | — | 90.8% |
Long Context Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121), Llama 4 Maverick: 31.4 (#274)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | 1280 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126), Llama 4 Maverick: 39.0 (#247)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | 1287 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | 1266 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | 860 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1289 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 62% |
| WildBench | — | 80% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Llama 4 Maverick?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Llama 4 Maverick?
Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Llama 4 Maverick lists at $0.19 and $0.65.
Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Llama 4 Maverick better for coding?
Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.8 versus 26.3 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 4 Maverick share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Llama 4 Maverick has 54.