Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 28× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.5

Rank #48 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

39.5

Rank #152 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.7 Flash in 0 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.2 to 27.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 85.4% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 43.8% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).

Side by side

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.539.5
Released2026-02-172026-07-15
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output30K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.03
Output $ / M tokens$2.50$0.13
Results tracked467

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 41.8 (#104), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
LMArena WebDev1374—
WeirdML52.3%—
LMArena Coding1458—
ALE-Bench1,150—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.3 (#43), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
Terminal-Bench57.3%—
τ²-bench Banking18%—
LMArena Search1189—
Vending-Bench 24,663—

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.2 (#30), Qwen3.7 Flash: 27.3 (#108)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
NYT Connections (extended)85.4%43.8%
Chess Puzzles24%23%
Epoch Capabilities Index152.01144.62
ARC-AGI-265.1%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark75%—
ARC-AGI-189.5%—
Thematic Generalization63.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1451—
Mystery Game Puzzles—15%
DTBench90.1%—
LMCA38.7%—
ForecastBench61.4—

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.0 (#54), Qwen3.7 Flash: 37.3 (#100)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)44.9%19.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202592.2%86.7%
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
ProofBench14%—
LMArena Math1455—

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#54), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#69)

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond89.3%82.3%
SimpleQA Verified30.2%—
LMArena Expert1440—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.2 (#88), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—
LMArena Document1416—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.7 (#38), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English1440—
LMArena Chinese1481—
LMArena French1477—
LMArena German1463—
LMArena Japanese1450—
LMArena Korean1417—
LMArena Russian1457—
LMArena Spanish1442—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 75.0 (#79), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1420—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.4 (#33), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
CL-bench22.2%—
CL-bench Life11.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1436—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.9 (#42), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Qwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1451—
LMArena Creative Writing1439—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1574—
LMArena Multi-Turn1456—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 28× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)'s lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper