Model comparison
Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 43.4 to 20.7.
- Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2.80 / $8.40 for Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
- Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 29.9 |
| Released | 2025-06-27 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 30K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $2.80 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $8.40 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 6 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1242 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| OSWorld | — | 5% |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 43.4 (#49), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.7 (#233)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 56% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 36% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | — |
| DTBench | 87.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |
Math Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1408 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1399 | — |
Multimodal Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 33.5 (#97)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | 1107 |
| Video-MME | — | 73.5% |
| GeoBench | — | 62% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 33.3% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | — |
| LMArena French | 1415 | — |
| LMArena German | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1349 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1413 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?
Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct lists at $2.80 and $8.40.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.