Model comparison
Grok 4 Fast vs Qwen-14B
Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 Fast scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4 Fast leads 60.0 to 27.6.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.4 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2025-09-19 | 2023-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 30 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 32.5 (#271), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1429 | 1071 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1159 | — |
| WeirdML | 42.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4 Fast: 29.5 (#86), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench Banking | 15.7% | — |
| Cybench | 30% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 22.2 (#201), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1412 | 1027 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.2 | 113.03 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 66.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 48.5% | — |
| DTBench | 82.7% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| ForecastBench | 60.5 | — |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
Math Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 38.9 (#123), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1419 | 1068 |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok 4 Fast: 32.0 (#214), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 19.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1411 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |
Multilingual Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 51.3 (#111), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1396 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1457 | 1077 |
| LMArena French | 1431 | — |
| LMArena German | 1383 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1352 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1357 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1415 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 73.2 (#121), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1387 | 1031 |
Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1415 | 1028 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 94.4% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 60.0 (#102), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1407 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1387 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1414 | 1022 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4 Fast better than Qwen-14B?
Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4 Fast or Qwen-14B better for coding?
Grok 4 Fast scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.5 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Qwen-14B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.