Model comparison
Grok 4.6 vs Qwen2.5 14B Instruct
Grok 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#19); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Grok 4.6 leads 58.0 to 37.1.
- Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is cheaper at $0.35 / $1.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.6.
- Grok 4.6 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 56.8 | 38.2 |
| Released | 2026-08-12 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 500K | 131K |
| Max output | 500K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | $1.40 |
| Results tracked | 49 | 3 |
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), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: 37.1 (#187)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 67.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 48% | — |
| CursorBench | 41.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 25.3% | — |
| SciCode | 56.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 67.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 39.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1464 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,508 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#25), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 17.2% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,047 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 61.3 (#18), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 67.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 75.9% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.5% | — |
| CritPt | 19.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 40% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 30.5% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1445 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| DTBench | 97.3% | — |
| LMCA | 48.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.48 | — |
Math Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 66.8 (#19), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 66% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 99.2% | — |
| ProofBench | 51% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1416 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#18), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 49.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1463 | — |
| MMLU | — | 79.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 43.9 (#18), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1265 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 40% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 53.3 (#67), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1422 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1479 | — |
| LMArena French | 1458 | — |
| LMArena German | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1383 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1408 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 75.6 (#59), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1431 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 44.4 (#62), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1453 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 62.5 (#77), Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1430 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1422 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?
Grok 4.6 has enough public results to be ranked (#19); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6 or Qwen2.5 14B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $1.40 per million output tokens; Grok 4.6 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Grok 4.6 or Qwen2.5 14B Instruct better for coding?
Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.6 does, with 500K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has 3.