Model comparison
Grok 4.1 vs Qwen3-1.7B
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 26.2 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 15.4.
- Qwen3-1.7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 26.2 |
| Released | 2025-11-17 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 33.4 (#246), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 33.8 (#47), Qwen3-1.7B: 24.5 (#108)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.4% |
| Cybench | 39% | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 28.3 (#91), Qwen3-1.7B: 18.5 (#263)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1436 | — |
Math Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 36.2 (#124), Qwen3-1.7B: 15.4 (#288)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1422 | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.1 leads
Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#129), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#273)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 38% |
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 53.6 (#64), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 74.0 (#106), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#96), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok 4.1: 62.6 (#71), Qwen3-1.7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1438 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen3-1.7B?
Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen3-1.7B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.