Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Magistral Small
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.1 leads 29.5 to 6.8.
- Magistral Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 30.2 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | 2025-06-10 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 40K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.50 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Magistral Small leads
Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Magistral Small: 38.4 (#176)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| SciCode | — | 35.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Magistral Small: 6.8 (#350)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 6.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | — |
| DTBench | — | 61.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 133.19 |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Magistral Small: 26.2 (#261)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 30% |
| LMArena Math | 1422 | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Magistral Small: 30.9 (#223)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | — |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena German | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Magistral Small?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.1 or Magistral Small better for coding?
Magistral Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.4 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Magistral Small share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Small has 10.