Model comparison
Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen3.5-Flash
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 5 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 43.2 to 32.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Vectara Hallucination Rate: 17.8% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 10.5% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
- Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.20 / $0.50 for Grok 4.1 Fast.
- Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 42.3 |
| Released | 2025-06-27 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Max output | 30K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.8 (#236), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1241 | 1243 |
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | 1412 |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | 221.8 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35), Qwen3.5-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | 462.69 |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.3 (#45), Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1404 |
| DTBench | 87.7% | 82.9% |
| SimpleBench | 56% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 20% |
| LMCA | — | 29.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.98 |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |
Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201), Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1408 | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 18.2% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 6.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | 10.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1398 | 1408 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 20.3% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71), Qwen3.5-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1446 |
| LMArena French | 1416 | 1412 |
| LMArena German | 1404 | 1389 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1347 | 1369 |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | 1344 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1379 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | 1399 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1374 |
Long Context Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | 1392 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126), Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1393 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen3.5-Flash?
Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3.5-Flash?
Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.1 Fast lists at $0.20 and $0.50.
Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (33.8 vs 33.9); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen3.5-Flash share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.