Model comparison

Grok 4 Fast vs Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)

Grok 4 Fast has enough public results to be ranked (#167); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 Fast xAI

39.4

Rank #167 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4 Fast and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) specifications
Grok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.4—
Released2025-09-192024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked306

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 32.5 (#271), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena WebDev1159—
WeirdML42.9%—
LMArena Coding1429—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 29.5 (#86), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
τ²-bench Banking15.7%—
Cybench30%—
LMArena Search1171—

Reasoning Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 22.2 (#201), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
Epoch Capabilities Index144.2113.14
ARC-AGI-25.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark66.1%—
ARC-AGI-148.5%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1412—
DTBench82.7%—
ForecastBench60.5—
HellaSwag—76.8%
WinoGrande—72.9%

Math Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 38.9 (#123), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Math1419—
GSM8K—86.7%

Knowledge Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 32.0 (#214), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
Vectara Hallucination Rate19.7%—
LMArena Expert1411—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.9%
MMLU—68%

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 51.3 (#111), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Non-English1396—
LMArena Chinese1457—
LMArena French1431—
LMArena German1383—
LMArena Japanese1352—
LMArena Korean1357—
LMArena Russian1389—
LMArena Spanish1415—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 73.2 (#121), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Instruction Following1387—

Long Context Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 63.2 (#3), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%—
LMArena Longer Query1415—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok 4 Fast: 60.0 (#102), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok 4 FastQwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Text1407—
LMArena Creative Writing1387—
LMArena Multi-Turn1414—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 Fast better than Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)?

Grok 4 Fast has enough public results to be ranked (#167); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 Fast and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Grok 4 Fast has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper