# Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen3.7 Max

> Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-1-fast-vs-qwen3-7-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 31.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 4% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 26% for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 51.5 |
| Rank | 136 | 42 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.20 | $2.50 |
| Output $/M | $0.50 | $7.50 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1242 | 1515 |
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | 1498 |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | 1,189 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| SciCode | — | 48.8% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 43.4 (#49)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 56% | 70.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | 85.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1483 |
| DTBench | 87.7% | 92.3% |
| CritPt | — | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| LMCA | — | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.68 |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |

## Math

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 4% | 26% |
| LMArena Math | 1408 | 1490 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1399 | 1488 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76)
- Qwen3.7 Max: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1530 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1484 |
| LMArena French | 1415 | — |
| LMArena German | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1349 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1413 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1460 |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | 1482 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | 1449 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1481 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3.7 Max?

Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.

### Is Grok 4.1 Fast or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and Qwen3.7 Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.