Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 xAI

47.8

Rank #49 Confirmed

Qwen1.5 4b Chat Alibaba (Qwen)

28.3

Rank #319 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 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 leads 58.7 to 23.9.
  • Qwen1.5 4b Chat has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index47.828.3
Released2025-07-09—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked4813

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 49.9 (#44), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 28.6 (#305)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Coding1408999
Aider Polyglot79.6%—
WeirdML45.7%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4: 32.1 (#62), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
Terminal-Bench27.2%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard63%—
GDPval21.1%—
Cybench43%—
DeepResearch Bench47.3%—
BALROG43.6%—
LMArena Search1142—
METR Time Horizons66.6%—

Reasoning Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 36.9 (#59), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 17.7 (#277)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Hard Prompts1409976
ARC-AGI-216%—
SimpleBench60.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73.6%—
ARC-AGI-166.7%—
Chess Puzzles28%—
Epoch Capabilities Index146.46—
ForecastBench60.9—

Math Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 46.5 (#58), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 27.9 (#233)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Math14221026
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584%—
Omni-MATH60.3%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)19.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 53.7 (#50), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.2 (#252)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Expert1417980
GPQA Diamond87%—
MMLU-Pro85.1%—
Confabulations12.4%—
GPQA (HELM)72.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4: 33.1 (#89), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Vision1211—
GeoBench45%—

Multilingual Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 52.0 (#98), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.2 (#285)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Non-English1403979
LMArena Chinese14281024
LMArena German1429902
LMArena Russian1409952
LMArena French1418—
LMArena Japanese1396—
LMArena Korean1376—
LMArena Spanish1419—

Instruction Following Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 79.4 (#4), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.3 (#295)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Instruction Following1387979
IFEval94.9%—

Long Context Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 63.1 (#4), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#285)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Longer Query1409988
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%—

Writing & Preference Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 58.7 (#111), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.9 (#304)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen1.5 4b Chat
LMArena Text1412997
LMArena Creative Writing1397969
LMArena Multi-Turn1416977
Short-Story Creative Writing76.9%—
WildBench79.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4 or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

Grok 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.9 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper