Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Grok 4.1 Fast
72
Winner · 5/8 categoriesQwen3.6 Plus
69
2/8 categoriesGrok 4.1 Fast· Qwen3.6 Plus
Pick Grok 4.1 Fast if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6 Plus only becomes the better choice if instruction following is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Grok 4.1 Fast has the cleaner overall profile here, landing at 72 versus 69. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Grok 4.1 Fast's sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 87.9 against 62. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is LongBench v2, 87% to 62%. Qwen3.6 Plus does hit back in instruction following, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.6 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok 4.1 Fast is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| AgenticGrok 4.1 Fast wins | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 74% | 61.6% |
| BrowseComp | 73% | — |
| OSWorld-Verified | 66% | 62.5% |
| Claw-Eval | 53.8% | 58.7% |
| DeepPlanning | 19.1% | 41.5% |
| QwenClawBench | — | 57.2% |
| QwenWebBench | — | 1502 |
| TAU3-Bench | — | 70.7% |
| VITA-Bench | — | 44.3% |
| Toolathlon | — | 39.8% |
| MCP Atlas | — | 48.2% |
| MCP-Tasks | — | 74.1% |
| WideResearch | — | 74.3% |
| CodingQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| HumanEval | 86% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified | 68% | 78.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 54% | — |
| SWE-bench Pro | 63% | 56.6% |
| SWE Multilingual | — | 73.8% |
| LiveCodeBench v6 | — | 87.1% |
| NL2Repo | — | 37.9% |
| Multimodal & GroundedGrok 4.1 Fast wins | ||
| MMMU-Pro | 91% | 78.8% |
| OfficeQA Pro | 83% | — |
| MMMU | — | 86.0% |
| RealWorldQA | — | 85.4% |
| OmniDocBench 1.5 | — | 91.2% |
| Video-MME (with subtitle) | — | 87.8% |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle) | — | 84.2% |
| MathVision | — | 88.0% |
| We-Math | — | 89.0% |
| DynaMath | — | 88.0% |
| MStar | — | 83.3% |
| SimpleVQA | — | 67.3% |
| ChatCVQA | — | 81.5% |
| MMLongBench-Doc | — | 62.0% |
| CC-OCR | — | 83.4% |
| AI2D_TEST | — | 94.4% |
| CountBench | — | 97.6% |
| RefCOCO (avg) | — | 93.5% |
| ODINW13 | — | 51.8% |
| ERQA | — | 65.7% |
| VideoMMMU | — | 84.0% |
| MLVU (M-Avg) | — | 86.7% |
| ScreenSpot Pro | — | 68.2% |
| ReasoningGrok 4.1 Fast wins | ||
| MuSR | 88% | — |
| BBH | 87% | — |
| LongBench v2 | 87% | 62% |
| MRCRv2 | 89% | — |
| AI-Needle | — | 68.3% |
| KnowledgeGrok 4.1 Fast wins | ||
| MMLU | 94% | — |
| GPQA | 92% | 90.4% |
| SuperGPQA | 90% | 71.6% |
| MMLU-Pro | 81% | 88.5% |
| HLE | 20% | 28.8% |
| FrontierScience | 83% | — |
| SimpleQA | 90% | — |
| MMLU-Redux | — | 94.5% |
| C-Eval | — | 93.3% |
| Instruction FollowingQwen3.6 Plus wins | ||
| IFEval | 90% | 94.3% |
| IFBench | — | 74.2% |
| MultilingualGrok 4.1 Fast wins | ||
| MGSM | 88% | — |
| MMLU-ProX | 83% | 84.7% |
| NOVA-63 | — | 57.9% |
| INCLUDE | — | 85.1% |
| PolyMath | — | 77.4% |
| VWT2k-lite | — | 84.3% |
| MAXIFE | — | 88.2% |
| Mathematics | ||
| AIME 2023 | 96% | — |
| AIME 2024 | 98% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 97% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | 92% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | 94% | — |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | 93% | — |
| BRUMO 2025 | 95% | — |
| MATH-500 | 89% | — |
| AIME26 | — | 95.3% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 96.7% |
| HMMT Nov 2025 | — | 94.6% |
| HMMT Feb 2026 | — | 87.8% |
| MMAnswerBench | — | 83.8% |
Grok 4.1 Fast is ahead overall, 72 to 69. The biggest single separator in this matchup is LongBench v2, where the scores are 87% and 62%.
Grok 4.1 Fast has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.9 versus 66. Inside this category, SuperGPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.9 versus 60.7. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Grok 4.1 Fast has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 87.9 versus 62. Inside this category, LongBench v2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Grok 4.1 Fast has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71 versus 62. Inside this category, DeepPlanning is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Grok 4.1 Fast has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.4 versus 78.8. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 94.3 versus 90. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Grok 4.1 Fast has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.8 versus 84.7. Inside this category, MMLU-ProX is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.