Model comparison
Grok 4.1 Fast vs Ring-2.6-1T
Grok 4.1 Fast has enough public results to be ranked (#136); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 1 category and Ring-2.6-1T in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 Fast leads 43.4 to 26.1.
- Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 36.9 |
| Released | 2025-06-27 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 30K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | — |
| Results tracked | 32 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.7
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | 432.57 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1242 | — |
| SciCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 Fast leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 43.4 (#49), Ring-2.6-1T: 26.1
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 56% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | — |
| CritPt | — | 3.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | — |
| DTBench | 87.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |
Math Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1408 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1399 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Ring-2.6-1T?
Grok 4.1 Fast has enough public results to be ranked (#136); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.7 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Ring-2.6-1T share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.