Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Qwen2.5-Max
Grok 4.1 and Qwen2.5-Max score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.5 vs 40.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 41.8 to 33.7.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | 1359 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | 1337 |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | 1377 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Grok 4.1 and Qwen2.5-Max score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.5 vs 40.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen2.5-Max share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.