Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.1 leads 62.4 to 49.4.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | 1314 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | 1299 |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1298 |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | 1289 |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1275 |
Long Context Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.