# Grok 4.1 vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

> Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-1-vs-qwen2-5-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.1 leads 38.9 to 16.2.
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.5 | 30.1 |
| Rank | 134 | 297 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | — | $2.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.7 (#169)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 19.2 (#266)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1435 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |

## Math

- Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 16.2 (#296)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1422 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#266)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 46.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | — |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena German | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1397 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | — |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1437 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.5 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.