Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 Fast vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 Fast xAI

39.4

Rank #167 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.1

Rank #119 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 Fast scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B in 6 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Grok 4 Fast leads 63.2 to 43.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Vectara Hallucination Rate: 19.7% for Grok 4 Fast and 11.2% for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B.
  • Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.442.1
Released2025-09-192026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$3.20
Results tracked3027

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Grok 4 Fast: 32.5 (#271), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#162)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena WebDev11591360
LMArena Coding14291436
SciCode—35.6%
WeirdML42.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 29.5 (#86), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
τ²-bench Banking15.7%—
Cybench30%—
LMArena Search1171—

Reasoning Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Grok 4 Fast: 22.2 (#201), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 27.2 (#123)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Hard Prompts14121421
DTBench82.7%84.3%
ARC-AGI-25.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark66.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)—51.7%
ARC-AGI-148.5%—
CritPt—0.9%
Thematic Generalization—51.2%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
LMCA—32.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.2—
ForecastBench60.5—

Math Too close to call

Grok 4 Fast: 38.9 (#123), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#112)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Math14191432

Knowledge Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads

Grok 4 Fast: 32.0 (#214), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.8 (#142)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
Vectara Hallucination Rate19.7%11.2%
LMArena Expert14111432

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: —, Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.6 (#57)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Vision—1245

Multilingual Too close to call

Grok 4 Fast: 51.3 (#111), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 51.6 (#107)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Non-English13961400
LMArena Chinese14571462
LMArena French14311442
LMArena German13831426
LMArena Japanese13521367
LMArena Korean13571352
LMArena Russian13891400
LMArena Spanish14151424

Instruction Following Too close to call

Grok 4 Fast: 73.2 (#121), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 73.8 (#115)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Instruction Following13871399

Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 43.0 (#109)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Longer Query14151410
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%—

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Grok 4 Fast: 60.0 (#102), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 60.0 (#105)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.5 122B-A10B
LMArena Text14071417
LMArena Creative Writing13871368
LMArena Multi-Turn14141416

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 Fast better than Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4 Fast or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B better for coding?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 32.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper