Model comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen1.5-7B

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.5 xAI

55.0

Rank #25 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-7B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #273 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 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 4.5 leads 65.8 to 29.6.
  • Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.5 and Qwen1.5-7B specifications
Grok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index55.031.4
Released2026-07-082024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked5213

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35), Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Coding14741107
DeepSWE53.8%—
FrontierCode42.4%—
LMArena WebDev1553—
SciCode54.1%—
WeirdML46.4%—
ALE-Bench1,309—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17), Qwen1.5-7B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
APEX-Agents56.2%—
τ²-bench Banking47.9%—
PostTrainBench23.4%—
GBAEval65.4%—
GDP.pdf14%—
LMArena Search1213—
Vending-Bench 23,887—

Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25), Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Hard Prompts14621065
ARC-AGI-252.6%—
SimpleBench70%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.9%—
ARC-AGI-187.2%—
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles36%—
DTBench96.5%—
LMCA45.2%—
Surface Evolver Bench74.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index153.92—

Math Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Math14591080
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)57.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 424.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench31%—

Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Expert14661055
GPQA Diamond93.4%—
SimpleQA Verified48.3%—
MMLU—62.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72), Qwen1.5-7B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Vision1288—
Blueprint-Bench 227.3%—
Furniture Assembly22.5%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Non-English14401058
LMArena Chinese14961141
LMArena Russian14481006
LMArena French1456—
LMArena German1446—
LMArena Japanese1428—
LMArena Korean1404—
LMArena Spanish1450—

Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Instruction Following14461058

Long Context Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Longer Query14631090

Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen1.5-7B
LMArena Text14481083
LMArena Creative Writing14421035
LMArena Multi-Turn14561062
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.5 better than Qwen1.5-7B?

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.5 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper