# Grok 4.1 vs QwQ-32B

> Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-1-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 5 categories and QwQ-32B in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.1 leads 62.6 to 50.9.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 39.4 |
| Rank | 135 | 153 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.1: 33.4 (#246)
- QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1445 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1214 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.1: 33.8 (#47)
- QwQ-32B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 39% | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.1: 28.3 (#91)
- QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1436 | 1326 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- Grok 4.1: 36.2 (#124)
- QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#129)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1417 | 1323 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.1: 53.6 (#64)
- QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1464 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1337 |
| LMArena German | 1447 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1396 | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | 1407 | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1438 | 1353 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.1: 74.0 (#106)
- QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#96)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.1: 62.6 (#71)
- QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1438 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.1 better than QwQ-32B?

Grok 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4.1 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.9 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and QwQ-32B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.