Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 vs Qwen2-72B

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 xAI

48.1

Rank #56 Confirmed

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #300 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4 leads 53.8 to 21.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 87% for Grok 4 and 40.8% for Qwen2-72B.
  • Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4Qwen2-72B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.130.0
Released2025-07-092024-06-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked4826

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 50.3 (#46), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
WeirdML45.7%11.3%
LMArena Coding14081196
Aider Polyglot79.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.5%
BigCodeBench Complete—54%

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 32.3 (#68), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
METR Time Horizons66.6%29.9%
Terminal-Bench27.2%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard63%—
GDPval21.1%—
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
Cybench43%—
DeepResearch Bench47.3%—
BALROG43.6%—
LMArena Search1142—

Reasoning Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 36.7 (#65), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts14091191
Epoch Capabilities Index146.44125.28
ARC-AGI-216%—
SimpleBench60.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73.6%—
ARC-AGI-166.7%—
Chess Puzzles28%—
ForecastBench60.9—

Math Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 48.4 (#64), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
LMArena Math14221235
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584%—
Omni-MATH60.3%—
MATH Level 5—39.1%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)19.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 53.8 (#55), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
GPQA Diamond87%40.8%
LMArena Expert14151171
MMLU-Pro85.1%—
Confabulations12.4%—
GPQA (HELM)72.7%—
MMLU—82.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4: 33.7 (#94), Qwen2-72B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
LMArena Vision1210—
GeoBench45%—

Multilingual Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 51.8 (#103), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English14031176
LMArena Chinese14271240
LMArena French14181170
LMArena German14291151
LMArena Japanese13941111
LMArena Korean13771083
LMArena Russian14101169
LMArena Spanish14201169

Instruction Following Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 79.2 (#5), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following13871181
IFEval94.9%—

Long Context Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 63.1 (#4), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query14091192
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%—

Writing & Preference Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 58.5 (#116), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen2-72B
LMArena Text14111203
LMArena Creative Writing13971181
LMArena Multi-Turn14161196
Short-Story Creative Writing76.9%—
WildBench79.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 better than Qwen2-72B?

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4 or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Grok 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.3 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 and Qwen2-72B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper