Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.6 xAI

56.8

Rank #19 Confirmed

Qwen1.5 4b Chat Alibaba (Qwen)

28.3

Rank #319 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.3 to 17.7.
  • Qwen1.5 4b Chat has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.828.3
Released2026-08-12—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked4913

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 58.0 (#14), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 28.6 (#305)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Coding1464999
DeepSWE67.5%—
FrontierCode48%—
CursorBench41.4%—
LMArena WebDev1620—
FrontierSWE25.3%—
SciCode56.5%—
WeirdML67.3%—
ALE-Bench1,508—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#25), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
APEX-Agents65.3%—
GDP.pdf17.2%—
Vending-Bench 29,047—

Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 61.3 (#18), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 17.7 (#277)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Hard Prompts1445976
ARC-AGI-267.1%—
SimpleBench75.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)80%—
ARC-AGI-187.5%—
CritPt19.7%—
Chess Puzzles40%—
EBR-Bench30.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.3%—
LMCA48.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.48—

Math Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 66.8 (#19), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 27.9 (#233)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Math14161026
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—
ProofBench51%—

Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#18), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.2 (#252)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Expert1463980
GPQA Diamond94%—
SimpleQA Verified49.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 43.9 (#18), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Vision1265—
Blueprint-Bench 233.2%—
Furniture Assembly40%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 53.3 (#67), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.2 (#285)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Non-English1422979
LMArena Chinese14791024
LMArena German1425902
LMArena Russian1427952
LMArena French1458—
LMArena Japanese1383—
LMArena Korean1395—
LMArena Spanish1408—

Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 75.6 (#59), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.3 (#295)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Instruction Following1431979

Long Context Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 44.4 (#62), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#285)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Longer Query1453988

Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 62.5 (#77), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.9 (#304)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Text1427997
LMArena Creative Writing1430969
LMArena Multi-Turn1422977

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.6 or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper