Model comparison

Grok 4.1 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.1 xAI

41.5

Rank #134 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 38.9.

Side by side

Grok 4.1 and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
Grok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.551.5
Released2025-11-172026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2.50
Output $ / M tokens—$7.50
Results tracked1933

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 33.7 (#253), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena WebDev12141515
LMArena Coding14451498
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
SciCode—48.8%
ALE-Bench—1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.1 leads

Grok 4.1: 34.1 (#49), Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
Cybench39%—
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 29.5 (#91), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14351483
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
DTBench—92.3%
LMCA—44%
Epoch Capabilities Index—153.68

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 38.9 (#120), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Math14221490
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—95.6%
ProofBench—26%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 39.5 (#133), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Expert14171488
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 53.4 (#68), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English14251474
LMArena Chinese14651530
LMArena Russian14341484
LMArena French1448—
LMArena German1446—
LMArena Japanese1397—
LMArena Korean1407—
LMArena Spanish1438—

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 73.8 (#111), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14001460

Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 43.2 (#100), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query14161482

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

Grok 4.1: 62.4 (#75), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.1Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text14371476
LMArena Creative Writing14111449
LMArena Multi-Turn14371481
EQ-Bench 4—1110

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.1 better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.1 or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 33.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 and Qwen3.7 Max share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper