Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 Fast vs Qwen3 32B

Grok 4 Fast and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.4 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 Fast xAI

39.4

Rank #167 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 Fast scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3 32B in 4 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Grok 4 Fast leads 63.2 to 43.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 94.4% for Grok 4 Fast and 74.2% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4 FastQwen3 32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.439.2
Released2025-09-192025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—131K
Max output—16K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.70
Output $ / M tokens—$2.80
Results tracked3026

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 32B leads

Grok 4 Fast: 32.5 (#271), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
LMArena Coding14291358
Aider Polyglot—40%
LMArena WebDev1159—
SciCode—35.4%
WeirdML42.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 32B leads

Grok 4 Fast: 29.5 (#86), Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%
τ²-bench Banking15.7%—
Cybench30%—
LMArena Search1171—

Reasoning Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 22.2 (#201), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
Kagi LLM Benchmark66.1%54.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts14121334
DTBench82.7%67.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.2138.51
ARC-AGI-25.3%—
ARC-AGI-148.5%—
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—5%
LMCA—17.3%
ForecastBench60.5—

Math Too close to call

Grok 4 Fast: 38.9 (#123), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
LMArena Math14191399
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—66.9%

Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads

Grok 4 Fast: 32.0 (#214), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
Vectara Hallucination Rate19.7%5.9%
LMArena Expert14111362
GPQA Diamond—65.7%

Multilingual Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 51.3 (#111), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English13961317
LMArena Chinese14571357
LMArena German13831341
LMArena Russian13891311
LMArena French1431—
LMArena Japanese1352—
LMArena Korean1357—
LMArena Spanish1415—

Instruction Following Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 73.2 (#121), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following13871305

Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%74.2%
LMArena Longer Query14151327

Writing & Preference Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 60.0 (#102), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3 32B
LMArena Text14071340
LMArena Creative Writing13871297
LMArena Multi-Turn14141331

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 Fast better than Qwen3 32B?

Grok 4 Fast and Qwen3 32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.4 vs 39.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is Grok 4 Fast or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 32.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Qwen3 32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper