Model comparison
Grok-2 (Dec 2024) vs Qwen-14B
Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen-14B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads 48.6 to 27.6.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.7 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2024-08-13 | 2023-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 33.3 (#258), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1287 | 1071 |
| WeirdML | 22.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 46.4% | — |
Reasoning Qwen-14B leads
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 16.9 (#299), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1272 | 1027 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.48 | 113.03 |
| SimpleBench | 22.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 54.8% | — |
| DTBench | 65.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 54.5% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
Math Qwen-14B leads
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 20.8 (#284), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1283 | 1068 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 11.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 54.9% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 63.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0.7% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 29.8 (#233), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 53.8% | — |
| Confabulations | 20.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1254 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |
Multilingual Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 43.1 (#188), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1282 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1289 | 1077 |
| LMArena French | 1318 | — |
| LMArena German | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1244 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1237 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1286 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1281 | — |
Instruction Following Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 66.9 (#202), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1270 | 1031 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.6% | — |
Long Context Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 38.8 (#190), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1276 | 1028 |
Writing & Preference Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads
Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 48.6 (#198), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)
| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1305 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1284 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1290 | 1022 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 63.6% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 45.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) better than Qwen-14B?
Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) or Qwen-14B better for coding?
Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.3 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok-2 (Dec 2024) and Qwen-14B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.