Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen3 Coder Next

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.1 Fast xAI

41.4

Rank #136 Confirmed

Qwen3 Coder Next Alibaba (Qwen)

34.3

Rank #232 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 43.4 to 22.4.
  • Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.12 / $0.80 for Qwen3 Coder Next.
  • Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.
  • Qwen3 Coder Next has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.434.3
Released2025-06-272026-02-02
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window128K262K
Max output30K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.20$0.12
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$0.80
Results tracked323

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 Coder Next leads

Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245), Qwen3 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena WebDev1242—
SciCode—32.3%
WeirdML—34.4%
LMArena Coding1411—
ALE-Bench394.93—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
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), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
SimpleBench56%—
NYT Connections (extended)87.4%—
CritPt—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1407—
DTBench87.7%—
ForecastBench61—

Math Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions60.9%—
ProofBench4%—
LMArena Math1408—

Knowledge Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
Vectara Hallucination Rate17.8%—
LMArena Expert1399—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Vision1201—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Non-English1391—
LMArena Chinese1441—
LMArena French1415—
LMArena German1404—
LMArena Japanese1349—
LMArena Korean1361—
LMArena Russian1387—
LMArena Spanish1413—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Instruction Following1376—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Longer Query1390—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.1 FastQwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Text1408—
LMArena Creative Writing1394—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1327—
LMArena Multi-Turn1389—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen3 Coder Next?

Grok 4.1 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3 Coder Next?

Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Coder Next lists at $0.12 and $0.80.

Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?

Qwen3 Coder Next scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.3 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen3 Coder Next share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper