# Grok 4.1 vs Qwen1.5-14B

> Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-1-vs-qwen1-5-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 16

## Summary

- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.1 leads 62.4 to 33.6.
- Qwen1.5-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 32.7 |
| Rank | 134 | 253 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | 1138 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49)
- Qwen1.5-14B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | 1113 |

## Math

- Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1125 |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | 1094 |
| MMLU | — | 68.6% |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1095 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1147 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1116 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1043 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | 1019 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1046 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | 1085 |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1102 |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1113 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75)
- Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1128 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | 1110 |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen1.5-14B?

Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (33.7 vs 33.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen1.5-14B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.