# Grok 4.1 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

> Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-1-vs-qwen2-5-7b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.1 leads 36.2 to 11.8.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 28.6 |
| Rank | 135 | 314 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.17 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.70 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.1: 33.4 (#246)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.1: 33.8 (#47)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.1: 28.3 (#91)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1436 | — |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.44 |

## Math

- Grok 4.1: 36.2 (#124)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1422 | — |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#129)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | — |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.1: 53.6 (#64)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1464 | — |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena German | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1396 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.1: 74.0 (#106)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | — |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#96)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.1: 62.6 (#71)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1438 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.9 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.