Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.3 vs Llama 2-7B

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.3 xAI

43.8

Rank #86 Confirmed

Llama 2-7B Meta

29.1

Rank #317 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.3 leads 58.5 to 28.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 25% for Grok 4.3 and 0% for Llama 2-7B.
  • Llama 2-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.3Llama 2-7B
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index43.829.1
Released2026-04-172023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output30K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$2.50—
Results tracked4029

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121), Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Coding14151002
LMArena WebDev1357—
SciCode47.3%—
WeirdML49.9%—
ALE-Bench944.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
GDP.pdf8%—
LMArena Search1165—
Vending-Bench 235.26—

Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68), Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
Chess Puzzles25%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts13961009
Epoch Capabilities Index149.1699.06
NYT Connections (extended)55.2%—
CritPt8%—
DTBench90.7%—
LMCA38.3%—
BIG-Bench Hard—39.2%
ForecastBench60.3—
HellaSwag—77.2%
LAMBADA—73.3%
PIQA—78.8%
WinoGrande—69.2%

Math Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74), Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Math13881042
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)42.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 414.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202593.3%—
ProofBench11%—
GSM8K—16.7%

Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Expert13851036
GPQA Diamond88.8%—
SimpleQA Verified33.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—45.9%
BoolQ—77.9%
MMLU—45.8%
OpenBookQA—58.6%
TriviaQA—73.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Vision1229—
Blueprint-Bench 20%—
ScienceQA—43.1%

Multilingual Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120), Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Non-English1385973
LMArena Chinese1422973
LMArena French1412970
LMArena German1395978
LMArena Russian1399995
LMArena Spanish13981007
LMArena Japanese1379—
LMArena Korean1356—

Instruction Following Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140), Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Instruction Following13661006

Long Context Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Longer Query1393999

Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads

Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118), Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298)

BenchmarkGrok 4.3Llama 2-7B
LMArena Text13971053
LMArena Creative Writing13801033
LMArena Multi-Turn14061029
EQ-Bench 41075—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.3 better than Llama 2-7B?

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.3 or Llama 2-7B better for coding?

Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.3 and Llama 2-7B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper