# Grok 4.1 Fast vs Qwen3.7 Plus

> Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-1-fast-vs-qwen3-7-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 8 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 32.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 87.4% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 74.8% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.60 for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Qwen3.7 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 45.0 |
| Rank | 131 | 66 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.20 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.50 | $1.60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.8 (#236)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.1 (#200)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1241 | — |
| SciCode | — | 45.5% |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.1 (#35)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.2 (#130)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.3 (#45)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 38.4 (#54)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | 74.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1460 |
| DTBench | 87.7% | 84% |
| SimpleBench | 56% | — |
| CritPt | — | 9.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| LMCA | — | 37.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.39 |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |

## Math

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 30.9 (#201)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 49.3 (#47)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1408 | 1467 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 32.6 (#203)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#46)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1398 | 1467 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | — |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#71)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.2 (#30)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | 1281 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.1 (#110)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 55.0 (#36)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1416 | 1471 |
| LMArena German | 1404 | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1347 | 1411 |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | 1453 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.8 (#127)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.9 (#49)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1439 |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#121)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#61)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | 1454 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.4 (#126)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.5 (#54)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | 1454 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1459 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | — |

## FAQ

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

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

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

Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.60.

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

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.1 versus 33.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

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

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.