Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.7 vs Llama 2-7B

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.7 xAI

53.1

Rank #37 Confirmed

Llama 2-7B Meta

29.1

Rank #317 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.7 leads 70.0 to 28.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 38% for Grok 4.7 and 0% for Llama 2-7B.
  • Llama 2-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.7Llama 2-7B
ProviderxAIMeta
Noometry Index53.129.1
Released2026-09-212023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked3929

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18), Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Coding14271002
FrontierCode47.6%—
CursorBench46.3%—
LMArena WebDev1639—
FrontierSWE29.5%—
SciCode57.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
APEX-Agents54.6%—
GDP.pdf22.8%—
Vending-Bench 210,537—

Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40), Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
Chess Puzzles38%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14131009
Epoch Capabilities Index153.5399.06
NYT Connections (extended)76.8%—
CritPt18%—
Mystery Game Puzzles29%—
DTBench96%—
LMCA49.4%—
BIG-Bench Hard—39.2%
HellaSwag—77.2%
LAMBADA—73.3%
PIQA—78.8%
WinoGrande—69.2%

Math Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39), Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Math14071042
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)53%—
FrontierMath Tier 417.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.1%—
ProofBench34%—
GSM8K—16.7%

Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Expert14221036
GPQA Diamond92.7%—
SimpleQA Verified56%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—45.9%
BoolQ—77.9%
MMLU—45.8%
OpenBookQA—58.6%
TriviaQA—73.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87), Llama 2-7B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Vision1228—
Blueprint-Bench 232.5%—
Furniture Assembly20.8%—
ScienceQA—43.1%

Multilingual Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116), Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Non-English1389973
LMArena Chinese1455973
LMArena French1455970
LMArena Russian1397995
LMArena Spanish14001007
LMArena German—978

Instruction Following Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105), Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Instruction Following14041006

Long Context Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Longer Query1413999

Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads

Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24), Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298)

BenchmarkGrok 4.7Llama 2-7B
LMArena Text13991053
LMArena Creative Writing13911033
LMArena Multi-Turn13931029
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2007—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.7 better than Llama 2-7B?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.7 or Llama 2-7B better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Llama 2-7B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 39 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper