Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 Fast vs Llama 3.1-70B

Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 Fast xAI

39.0

Rank #164 Confirmed

Llama 3.1-70B Meta

29.4

Rank #299 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 Fast scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Grok 4 Fast leads 63.2 to 37.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 42.9% for Grok 4 Fast and 9% for Llama 3.1-70B.
  • Llama 3.1-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index39.029.4
Released2025-09-192024-07-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—128K
Max output—4K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked3035

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 32.3 (#264), Llama 3.1-70B: 29.8 (#292)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
WeirdML42.9%9%
LMArena Coding14291260
LMArena WebDev1160—
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.1%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.8%

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 29.3 (#80), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.9 (#104)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
TheAgentCompany—6.9%
τ²-bench Banking15.7%—
Cybench30%—
BALROG—27.9%
LMArena Search1171—

Reasoning Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 22.5 (#179), Llama 3.1-70B: 20.8 (#215)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Hard Prompts14131241
DTBench82.7%60%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.21125.91
ARC-AGI-25.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark66.1%—
ARC-AGI-148.5%—
LMCA—14.8%
ForecastBench60.5—

Math Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 36.1 (#126), Llama 3.1-70B: 12.7 (#298)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Math14191252
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—3.6%
Omni-MATH—21%
MATH Level 5—36.7%

Knowledge Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 31.5 (#211), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.1 (#264)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Expert14111209
GPQA Diamond—44.2%
MMLU-Pro—65.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate19.7%—
GPQA (HELM)—42.6%
MMLU—80.1%

Multilingual Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 51.5 (#106), Llama 3.1-70B: 38.9 (#220)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Non-English13971219
LMArena Chinese14581215
LMArena French14331260
LMArena German13831222
LMArena Japanese13581132
LMArena Korean13591140
LMArena Russian13871234
LMArena Spanish14141253

Instruction Following Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 73.4 (#116), Llama 3.1-70B: 65.5 (#218)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Instruction Following13881231
IFEval—82.1%

Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#208)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Longer Query14151241
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%—

Writing & Preference Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 60.2 (#96), Llama 3.1-70B: 35.6 (#262)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastLlama 3.1-70B
LMArena Text14071261
LMArena Creative Writing13881232
LMArena Multi-Turn14141256
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—784
WildBench—75.8%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 Fast better than Llama 3.1-70B?

Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4 Fast or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?

Grok 4 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.3 versus 29.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Llama 3.1-70B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.

Related comparisons

Go deeper