XAI has made a bold move with Grok 4.1, a version that not only improves the raw power of its predecessor but directly targets the area where the AI battle is most intense in 2025: real-world usefulness, creativity, and emotional intelligence.
Announced on November 17, 2025, Grok 4.1 is now available to all users on grok.com, on 𝕏, and in the official iOS and Android apps. The model is activated gradually in “Auto” mode and can also be explicitly selected as “Grok 4.1” in the model selector.
Beyond the announcement, the big question in any tech media is clear: where does Grok 4.1 stand compared to heavyweight models like ChatGPT based on GPT-5.1 and other leading models?
A Quiet Rollout and a Clear Shift in User Preferences
Before making a fuss, xAI chose to quietly test Grok 4.1. Over two weeks, from November 1 to 14, the company gradually redirected a portion of real traffic from grok.com, 𝕏, and mobile apps toward different pre-release versions of the new model.
During this “silent rollout,” blind comparisons were conducted in pairs: users saw responses but didn’t know which version of the model produced each one. The results are compelling from a user experience perspective:
- Grok 4.1 was preferred in 64.78% of cases over the previous production model.
In a market where differences between top models are often subtle, nearly two-thirds of traffic experiments favoring the new model is a strong indicator that the improvement is tangible in practice.
A More Creative, Empathetic, and “Human” Model Without Losing Technical Sharpness
xAI describes Grok 4.1 as particularly strong in creative, emotional, and collaborative interactions. It’s not just about “getting answers right,” but responding with greater sensitivity to context, better detecting nuanced user intentions, and maintaining a more coherent personality throughout a conversation.
To achieve this, the company reused the same large-scale reinforcement learning infrastructure used to train Grok 4, but now focused on refining more difficult-to-quantify aspects:
- Conversational style.
- Personality and tone.
- Perceived helpfulness.
- Alignment with human expectations in complex scenarios.
Instead of relying solely on human labels, xAI has taken an additional step: using frontier agentic reasoning models like “reward models”, capable of autonomously evaluating thousands of responses and guiding large-scale refinement of Grok 4.1. This approach is trending: employing advanced models to judge and fine-tune other models.
EQ-Bench and Creative Writing: The Race for Emotional Intelligence
A key message from xAI is that Grok 4.1 is not only “smart,” but also more skilled in emotional territory. To measure this, the company used EQ-Bench3, a benchmark focused on:
- Emotional understanding.
- Empathy and interpersonal skills.
- Ability to provide helpful responses in role-play and sensitive conversation scenarios.
EQ-Bench presents 45 complex scenarios, usually multi-turn, and responses are evaluated with a detailed rubric and paired comparisons, normalized into Elo scores. An automatic judge, based on an Anthropic model (Claude Sonnet 3.7), is used for official scoring, providing some methodological independence.
While xAI has not yet shared a specific placement, they indicate Grok 4.1 shows significant improvement over Grok 4 in these tasks, ranking high on the EQ-Bench leaderboard.
A similar trend is seen with Creative Writing v3, which tests 32 creative prompts over three iterations. Here, rubrics and Elo comparisons between models are used, and xAI reports clear advances in literary quality and originality with Grok 4.1 compared to previous versions.
LMArena Leadership: Grok 4.1 Thinking Tops the Text Ranking
Where concrete positions are available is in the Text Arena of LMArena, an informal league popular among the community for blind model duels.
In this environment, xAI places both variants of Grok 4.1 at the top:
- Grok 4.1 Thinking (“quasarflux”):
- Overall #1 position.
- 1,483 Elo points, with a 31-point lead over the best non-xAI model.
- Grok 4.1 Non-Thinking (“tensor”):
- Fast mode, without “thinking tokens.”
- Second place with 1,465 Elo points, outperforming full-reasoning models from other providers.
For xAI, the message is clear: even the quick version, optimized for instant responses, ranks above many models that rely on extensive reasoning chains.
Fewer Hallucinations: The Achilles’ Heel Everyone Wants to Reduce
Another key front is reducing hallucinations, especially in factual queries. In Grok 4.1, xAI has focused post-training on reducing factual errors in “info-seeking” prompts, precisely the use case where errors are most impactful.
According to company data:
- The hallucination rate was measured on a stratified sample of real production queries.
- The FActScore benchmark, with 500 biographical questions, was used to evaluate answer accuracy.
- The metric is the percentage of atomic statements with major or minor errors, averaged macro-wise.
The results show a notable reduction in hallucinations compared to Grok 4 in fast web-search mode. While not infallible, it’s another step toward generative AIs that make less factual confusion for users seeking specific data.
Where Does Grok 4.1 Stand Compared to ChatGPT (GPT-5.1) and Other Giants?
The debut of Grok 4.1 occurs within a highly competitive “premium” language model segment. As of 2025, the high-end market includes:
- Grok 4.1 (xAI).
- ChatGPT based on GPT-5.1 (OpenAI).
- Advanced models from Anthropic (e.g., Claude 3.5 Sonnet).
- Models from Google like Gemini 1.5 Pro and successors.
While no unified official rankings exist, an approximate positioning can be crafted based on public info and benchmarks from 2025.
Comparison Table: Grok 4.1 versus Other High-End Models
Qualitative summary based on public data and available official info. Only concrete figures are shown when disclosed by providers.
| Model | Organization | Main Strength | Public Metrics | Nuances & Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grok 4.1 Thinking | xAI | Advanced reasoning and creative/emotional conversation | #1 in LMArena Text Arena (~1,483 Elo); preferred in 64.78% of blind tests vs. Grok 4 | Dependent on the 𝕏 ecosystem; EQ-Bench and writing rankings pending public official listing |
| Grok 4.1 Non-Thinking | xAI | Fast responses with good quality-latency balance | #2 in LMArena (~1,465 Elo), above full-reasoning models from other providers | Less depth of reasoning than the Thinking version, but with strong web search support |
| ChatGPT (GPT-5.1) | OpenAI | Balanced generalist model, large ecosystem of tools, plugins, and APIs | No unified Elo in LMArena; leads in many internal and third-party benchmarks | More conservative in style/responses; strong focus on safety and filtering—can limit riskier or more creative outputs |
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Anthropic | Long context, clear writing, focus on safety | Good performance across understanding, writing, reasoning benchmarks; official judge in EQ-Bench3 | Less integrated in mass-market apps; more enterprise/emphasis on productivity |
| Gemini 1.5 Pro | Multimodal (text, image, audio, video) and Google service integration | Strong in multimodal tasks and audiovisual comprehension; good reasoning benchmark scores | Dependent on Google’s ecosystem and regional availability; benchmark documentation can be fragmented |
This comparison marks an interesting shift: years ago, the whole debate revolved around “which model is smartest?” Now, the focus has shifted to how these models perform in real user interactions: preference rates, hallucination frequency, conversational quality, and fit within specific workflows.
In these terms, Grok 4.1 aims to stand out as a model that is:
- More expressive with a distinct personality.
- Better at handling emotional and creative tone.
- Showing tangible improvements in factual accuracy in its fast web-search mode.
A Future of More “Opinionated” Models
The tech community senses that we’re entering an era where large language models increasingly converge in raw capabilities, and “the best” model is no longer a universal label.
For software development, ChatGPT based on GPT-5.1 might remain dominant because of its ecosystem and integration maturity. Claude could stay preferred for lengthy documents or corporate policies, thanks to its conservative style and focus on safety. Gemini retains a strong position in multimodal and video/audio data. And for heavy 𝕏 users valuing more “personality” in conversations, Grok 4.1 now appears as a very serious alternative.
Ultimately, what matters is that Grok 4.1 proves xAI’s ambition: not just to have a model embedded in 𝕏, but to be a direct competitor in the top tier of general-purpose LLMs.
FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)
1. How does Grok 4.1 differ from ChatGPT based on GPT-5.1 in daily use?
Grok 4.1 emphasizes a more defined personality and a more expressive conversational style, especially focused on creativity and emotional management. ChatGPT (GPT-5.1) maintains a more balanced and conservative approach, heavily oriented towards productivity, software development, and general tasks, with a broader and more mature ecosystem of tools and APIs.
2. Is Grok 4.1 really better than other models in benchmarks like LMArena?
Based on publicly shared data by xAI, Grok 4.1 Thinking ranks #1 in the LMArena Text Arena with around 1,483 Elo, and the fast version Non-Thinking is #2 with about 1,465 Elo. These are significant figures, but it’s important to remember that no benchmark captures all nuances of real-world use.
3. Has Grok 4.1 solved the “hallucination” problem in generative AI?
No. Grok 4.1 is still a generative model and can produce factual errors. However, internal evaluations by xAI indicate a significant reduction in hallucination rates in info-seeking queries, both in real traffic and in the FActScore benchmark. This means fewer incorrect answers, but not an outright elimination of the issue.
4. Which AI model should a company choose in 2025: Grok 4.1, ChatGPT (GPT-5.1), or another?
It depends on the use case. For deep integrations into applications and internal workflows, ChatGPT (GPT-5.1) remains a strong option due to its ecosystem. Grok 4.1 appeals if the organization is active on 𝕏 or values a more conversational, creative interaction style. Claude or Gemini may be preferable for security-focused, long-context, or multimodal needs. The best approach usually involves pilot testing multiple models before standardizing on one.