Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen1.5-110B

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.1 Fast xAI

40.9

Rank #131 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 42.3 to 21.7.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.933.6
Released2025-06-272024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window128K—
Max output30K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.20—
Output $ / M tokens$0.50—
Results tracked3220

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), Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding14111184
LMArena WebDev1241—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
ALE-Bench394.93—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
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), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts14071168
ForecastBench6157.7
SimpleBench56%—
NYT Connections (extended)87.4%—
DTBench87.7%—

Math Too close to call

Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math14081185
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions60.9%—
ProofBench4%—

Knowledge Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203), Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert13981144
Vectara Hallucination Rate17.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Vision1201—

Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English13911142
LMArena Chinese14411206
LMArena French14161150
LMArena German14041123
LMArena Japanese13471074
LMArena Korean13611044
LMArena Russian13871118
LMArena Spanish14111141

Instruction Following Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following13761158

Long Context Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query13901157

Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 Fast leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text14081175
LMArena Creative Writing13941148
LMArena Multi-Turn13891160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1327—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.8 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen1.5-110B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper