Model comparison

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3-1.7B

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.6 xAI

56.9

Rank #21 Confirmed

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.6

Rank #336 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3-1.7B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.6 leads 67.0 to 16.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 99.2% for Grok 4.6 and 8.1% for Qwen3-1.7B.
  • Qwen3-1.7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.6 and Qwen3-1.7B specifications
Grok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.926.6
Released2026-08-122025-04-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked494

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 58.5 (#16), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
DeepSWE67.5%—
FrontierCode48%—
CursorBench41.4%—
LMArena WebDev1617—
FrontierSWE25.3%—
SciCode56.5%—
WeirdML67.3%—
LMArena Coding1465—
ALE-Bench1,508—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27), Qwen3-1.7B: 24.7 (#115)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
APEX-Agents65.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.4%
GDP.pdf17.2%—
Vending-Bench 29,047—

Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.2 (#267)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
Chess Puzzles40%0%
ARC-AGI-267.1%—
SimpleBench75.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)80%—
ARC-AGI-187.5%—
CritPt19.7%—
EBR-Bench30.5%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1447—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.3%—
LMCA48.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.44—

Math Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24), Qwen3-1.7B: 16.3 (#294)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%8.1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
ProofBench51%—
LMArena Math1423—

Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#278)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
GPQA Diamond94%38%
SimpleQA Verified49.3%—
LMArena Expert1467—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 233.2%—
Furniture Assembly40%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Non-English1420—
LMArena Chinese1480—
LMArena French1461—
LMArena German1431—
LMArena Japanese1376—
LMArena Korean1397—
LMArena Russian1422—
LMArena Spanish1404—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Instruction Following1431—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Longer Query1454—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Text1428—
LMArena Creative Writing1428—
LMArena Multi-Turn1425—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen3-1.7B?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 26.6 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Qwen3-1.7B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper