Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Qwen2-72B
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.1 leads 62.4 to 40.8.
- Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 30.0 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | 2024-06-07 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | 1196 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| Cybench | 39% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | 1191 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.28 |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |
Multilingual Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1240 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1170 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | 1083 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1169 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | 1169 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1181 |
Long Context Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1192 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | 1196 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen2-72B?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen2-72B better for coding?
Grok 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.7 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen2-72B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.