Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 Fast vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 Fast xAI

39.4

Rank #167 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 Fast scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 32.0.

Side by side

Grok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.445.3
Released2025-09-192026-06-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$1.60
Results tracked3032

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Grok 4 Fast: 32.5 (#271), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding14291473
FrontierCode—10.2%
LMArena WebDev1159—
SciCode—45.5%
WeirdML42.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 29.5 (#86), Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%
τ²-bench Banking15.7%—
Cybench30%—
LMArena Search1171—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Grok 4 Fast: 22.2 (#201), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts14121460
DTBench82.7%84%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.2147.37
ARC-AGI-25.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark66.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
ARC-AGI-148.5%—
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
LMCA—37.6%
ForecastBench60.5—

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Grok 4 Fast: 38.9 (#123), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math14191466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Grok 4 Fast: 32.0 (#214), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Expert14111467
GPQA Diamond—87.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate19.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Grok 4 Fast: 51.3 (#111), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English13961445
LMArena Chinese14571510
LMArena French14311473
LMArena German13831471
LMArena Japanese13521413
LMArena Korean13571415
LMArena Russian13891457
LMArena Spanish14151457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Grok 4 Fast: 73.2 (#121), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following13871440

Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads

Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query14151455
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Grok 4 Fast: 60.0 (#102), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text14071455
LMArena Creative Writing13871439
LMArena Multi-Turn14141460

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 Fast better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4 Fast or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.6 versus 32.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper