Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.1 leads 36.2 to 11.8.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 28.6 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Grok 4.1: 33.4 (#246), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 33.8 (#47), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 28.3 (#91), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1436 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.44 |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 36.2 (#124), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1422 | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#129), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | — |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 53.6 (#64), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1464 | — |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena German | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1396 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 74.0 (#106), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#96), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 62.6 (#71), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1438 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.9 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.