Model comparison

Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen-14B

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.1 Fast xAI

40.9

Rank #131 Confirmed

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.8

Rank #273 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 57.4 to 27.8.
  • Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen-14B specifications
Grok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.930.8
Released2025-06-272023-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window128K—
Max output30K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.20—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked3218

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), Qwen-14B: 30.6 (#283)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Coding14111072
LMArena WebDev1241—
ALE-Bench394.93—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35), Qwen-14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard69.6%—
τ²-bench Banking13.1%—
LMArena Search1171—
Vending-Bench 21,107—

Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.3 (#45), Qwen-14B: 18.7 (#255)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts14071027
SimpleBench56%—
NYT Connections (extended)87.4%—
DTBench87.7%—
BIG-Bench Hard—55%
Epoch Capabilities Index—112.8
ForecastBench61—
LAMBADA—71.1%
PIQA—79.9%

Math Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201), Qwen-14B: 28.7 (#224)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Math14081068
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions60.9%—
ProofBench4%—
GSM8K—61.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203), Qwen-14B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
Vectara Hallucination Rate17.8%—
LMArena Expert1398—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—84.4%
BoolQ—86.2%
MMLU—66.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71), Qwen-14B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Vision1201—

Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110), Qwen-14B: 27.7 (#270)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Non-English13911042
LMArena Chinese14411077
LMArena French1416—
LMArena German1404—
LMArena Japanese1347—
LMArena Korean1361—
LMArena Russian1387—
LMArena Spanish1411—

Instruction Following Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127), Qwen-14B: 52.6 (#284)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Instruction Following13761031

Long Context Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#276)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Longer Query13901029

Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126), Qwen-14B: 27.8 (#294)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen-14B
LMArena Text14081051
LMArena Creative Writing13941028
LMArena Multi-Turn13891022
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1327—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen-14B?

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen-14B better for coding?

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

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen-14B share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper