Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.6 vs Llama 2-13B

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.6 xAI

56.9

Rank #21 Confirmed

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.4 to 12.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 97.3% for Grok 4.6 and 42.2% for Llama 2-13B.
  • Llama 2-13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.6Llama 2-13B
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index56.929.6
Released2026-08-122023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked4932

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 58.5 (#16), Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Coding14651062
DeepSWE67.5%—
FrontierCode48%—
CursorBench41.4%—
LMArena WebDev1617—
FrontierSWE25.3%—
SciCode56.5%—
WeirdML67.3%—
ALE-Bench1,508—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27), Llama 2-13B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
APEX-Agents65.3%—
GDP.pdf17.2%—
Vending-Bench 29,047—

Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20), Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
Chess Puzzles40%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14471051
DTBench97.3%42.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.44106.17
ARC-AGI-267.1%—
SimpleBench75.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)80%—
ARC-AGI-187.5%—
CritPt19.7%—
EBR-Bench30.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
LMCA48.5%—
BIG-Bench Hard—58.2%
HellaSwag—80.7%
LAMBADA—76.5%
PIQA—80.8%
WinoGrande—72.8%

Math Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24), Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Math14231065
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—
ProofBench51%—
GSM8K—36.9%

Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20), Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Expert14671030
GPQA Diamond94%—
SimpleQA Verified49.3%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.3%
BoolQ—82.4%
MMLU—55.6%
OpenBookQA—57%
TriviaQA—79.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23), Llama 2-13B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 233.2%—
Furniture Assembly40%—
LMArena Document1452—
ScienceQA—55.8%

Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74), Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Non-English14201024
LMArena Chinese14801001
LMArena French14611044
LMArena German14311009
LMArena Japanese1376894
LMArena Korean1397953
LMArena Russian14221055
LMArena Spanish14041087

Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63), Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Instruction Following14311045

Long Context Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66), Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Longer Query14541064

Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80), Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Llama 2-13B
LMArena Text14281084
LMArena Creative Writing14281047
LMArena Multi-Turn14251050

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Llama 2-13B?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.6 or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.5 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Llama 2-13B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper