Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs phi-3-medium 14B
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MicrosoftSummary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.1 leads 39.5 to 9.1.
- phi-3-medium 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 29.7 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | 2024-04-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding phi-3-medium 14B leads
Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 48.7% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 121.23 |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 17.6% |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 27.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| MMLU | — | 78% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| 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), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), phi-3-medium 14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than phi-3-medium 14B?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.1 or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?
phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.8 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and phi-3-medium 14B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.