Model comparison
Grok 4 Fast vs Qwen1.5-7B
Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 Fast scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4 Fast leads 60.2 to 29.8.
- Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.0 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2025-09-19 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 30 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Grok 4 Fast: 32.3 (#264), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1429 | 1107 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1160 | — |
| WeirdML | 42.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4 Fast: 29.3 (#80), Qwen1.5-7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench Banking | 15.7% | — |
| Cybench | 30% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 22.5 (#179), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1413 | 1066 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 66.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 48.5% | — |
| DTBench | 82.7% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.21 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.5 | — |
Math Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 36.1 (#126), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1419 | 1080 |
Knowledge Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 31.5 (#211), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1411 | 1055 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 19.7% | — |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |
Multilingual Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 51.5 (#106), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1397 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1458 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1433 | — |
| LMArena German | 1383 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1359 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1414 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 73.4 (#116), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1388 | 1058 |
Long Context Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1415 | 1090 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 94.4% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4 Fast leads
Grok 4 Fast: 60.2 (#96), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | Grok 4 Fast | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1407 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1388 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1414 | 1061 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4 Fast better than Qwen1.5-7B?
Grok 4 Fast is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4 Fast or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (32.3 vs 31.6); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Qwen1.5-7B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.