Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.1 xAI

41.5

Rank #134 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #67 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B in 7 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads 53.3 to 39.5.
  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.546.0
Released2025-11-172026-02-01
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.60
Output $ / M tokens—$3.60
Results tracked1936

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 42.0 (#114)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena WebDev12141400
LMArena Coding14451465

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 33.3 (#53)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
APEX-Agents—24.9%
τ²-bench Airline—81.5%
τ²-bench Banking—9.8%
τ²-bench Retail—84.4%
τ²-bench Telecom—97.8%
Cybench39%—

Reasoning Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 34.5 (#70)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Hard Prompts14351448
Kagi LLM Benchmark—73.7%
NYT Connections (extended)—58.9%
Chess Puzzles—13%
Thematic Generalization—65.1%
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
DTBench—87.5%
LMCA—37.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—146.65

Math Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 46.1 (#73)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Math14221454
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—31.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—88.9%

Knowledge Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.3 (#58)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Expert14171462
GPQA Diamond—86.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.1: —, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 40.7 (#44)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Vision—1263

Multilingual Too close to call

Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.7 (#59)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Non-English14251430
LMArena Chinese14651500
LMArena French14481461
LMArena German14461447
LMArena Japanese13971426
LMArena Korean14071384
LMArena Russian14341429
LMArena Spanish14381441

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 75.0 (#77)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Instruction Following14001424

Long Context Too close to call

Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 44.1 (#74)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Longer Query14161442

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 62.3 (#79)

BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Text14371438
LMArena Creative Writing14111401
LMArena Multi-Turn14371446
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1478

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B better for coding?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.0 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper