Model comparison
Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen3 32B
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3 32B in 4 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 42.3 to 19.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 69.6% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 48.7% for Qwen3 32B.
- Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
- Qwen3 32B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
- Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-06-27 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 30K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3 32B leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.8 (#236), Qwen3 32B: 37.3 (#184)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | 1358 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1241 | — |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35), Qwen3 32B: 32.3 (#58)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | 48.7% |
| 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), Qwen3 32B: 19.6 (#233)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1335 |
| DTBench | 87.7% | 67.5% |
| SimpleBench | 56% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |
Math Qwen3 32B leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201), Qwen3 32B: 37.9 (#89)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1408 | 1399 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#112)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | 5.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1398 | 1362 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71), Qwen3 32B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110), Qwen3 32B: 45.8 (#162)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1357 |
| LMArena German | 1404 | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1311 |
| LMArena French | 1416 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1347 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127), Qwen3 32B: 69.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1305 |
Long Context Qwen3 32B leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121), Qwen3 32B: 43.7 (#83)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126), Qwen3 32B: 53.1 (#158)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1331 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen3 32B?
Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3 32B?
Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3 32B better for coding?
Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.3 versus 33.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 32B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen3 32B share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.