Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs Qwen1.5-32B

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.5

Rank #293 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.8 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 89.3% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.
  • Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.630.5
Released2026-02-172024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output30K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$2.50—
Results tracked4621

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Coding14591155
LMArena WebDev1375—
WeirdML52.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
BigCodeBench Complete—42%
ALE-Bench1,150—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
Terminal-Bench57.3%—
τ²-bench Banking18%—
LMArena Search1189—
Vending-Bench 24,663—

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14511130
ARC-AGI-265.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
NYT Connections (extended)85.4%—
ARC-AGI-189.5%—
Chess Puzzles24%—
Thematic Generalization63.8%—
DTBench90.1%—
LMCA38.7%—
Epoch Capabilities Index151.98—
ForecastBench61.4—

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math14551155
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)44.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%—
ProofBench14%—

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond89.3%30.7%
LMArena Expert14391126
SimpleQA Verified30.2%—
MMLU—74.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98), Qwen1.5-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—
LMArena Document1416—

Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English14411106
LMArena Chinese14811177
LMArena French14761101
LMArena German14651058
LMArena Japanese14491027
LMArena Korean14171008
LMArena Russian14581073
LMArena Spanish14431089

Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14201116

Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query14371146
CL-bench22.2%—
CL-bench Life11.9%—

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text14511137
LMArena Creative Writing14381083
LMArena Multi-Turn14561140
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1574—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper