Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen Plus

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.1 Fast xAI

41.4

Rank #136 Confirmed

Qwen Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

37.1

Rank #210 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen Plus in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 43.4 to 28.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 87.7% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 81.1% for Qwen Plus.
  • Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
  • Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Grok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.437.1
Released2025-06-272024-01-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output30K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.20$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$1.20
Results tracked3220

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen Plus leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245), Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Coding14111328
LMArena WebDev1242—
ALE-Bench394.93—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39), Qwen Plus: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
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: 43.4 (#49), Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts14071317
DTBench87.7%81.1%
SimpleBench56%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—63.3%
NYT Connections (extended)87.4%—
LMCA—24%
ForecastBench61—

Math Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221), Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Math14081326
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions60.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—17.8%
ProofBench4%—
MATH Level 5—65.3%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—1.7%

Knowledge Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Expert13991328
GPQA Diamond—48.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate17.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76), Qwen Plus: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Vision1201—

Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114), Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Non-English13911310
LMArena Chinese14411347
LMArena Japanese13491251
LMArena Russian13871323
LMArena French1415—
LMArena German1404—
LMArena Korean1361—
LMArena Spanish1413—

Instruction Following Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133), Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Instruction Following13761303

Long Context Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Longer Query13901324

Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131), Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen Plus
LMArena Text14081326
LMArena Creative Writing13941293
LMArena Multi-Turn13891336
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1327—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen Plus?

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen Plus?

Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen Plus better for coding?

Qwen Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen Plus share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper