Model comparison
Grok 4.7 vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 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 writing & preference, where Grok 4.7 leads 70.0 to 23.8.
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 53.1 | 28.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-21 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 500K | — |
| Max output | 500K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | — |
| Results tracked | 39 | 13 |
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), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | 999 |
| FrontierCode | 47.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 46.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1639 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | — |
| SciCode | 57.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 54.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 22.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,537 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1413 | 976 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 76.8% | — |
| CritPt | 18% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 38% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 29% | — |
| DTBench | 96% | — |
| LMCA | 49.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.53 | — |
Math Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1407 | 1026 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 53% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 34% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1422 | 980 |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 56% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1228 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 32.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 20.8% | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1389 | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | 1024 |
| LMArena Russian | 1397 | 952 |
| LMArena French | 1455 | — |
| LMArena German | — | 902 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1400 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 978 |
Long Context Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1413 | 988 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1399 | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1391 | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1393 | 977 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2007 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.7 or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?
Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.