Model comparison
Grok 4.3 vs Qwen1.5-7B
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.3 leads 58.6 to 29.8.
- Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.6 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2026-04-17 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 30K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | — |
| Results tracked | 40 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 41.3 (#117), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1415 | 1107 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1357 | — |
| SciCode | 47.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 49.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 944.17 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.3: 27.6 (#93), Qwen1.5-7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| GDP.pdf | 8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1165 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 35.26 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 34.9 (#60), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1397 | 1066 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 55.2% | — |
| CritPt | 8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 25% | — |
| DTBench | 90.7% | — |
| LMCA | 38.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.13 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
Math Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 45.8 (#60), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1388 | 1080 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 42.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 14.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 11% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#57), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1385 | 1055 |
| GPQA Diamond | 88.8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.2% | — |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#96), Qwen1.5-7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1231 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 0% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 50.7 (#114), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1385 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1423 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1399 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1412 | — |
| LMArena German | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1357 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1402 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 72.3 (#135), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1366 | 1058 |
Long Context Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#118), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1393 | 1090 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 58.6 (#112), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1380 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1406 | 1061 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1075 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.3 better than Qwen1.5-7B?
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.3 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.3 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.3 and Qwen1.5-7B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.