Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 xAI

48.1

Rank #56 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where Grok 4 leads 63.1 to 42.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 28% for Grok 4 and 21% for Qwen3.5-Flash.

Side by side

Grok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.142.5
Released2025-07-092026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked4832

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 50.3 (#46), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding14081412
Aider Polyglot79.6%—
LMArena WebDev—1244
WeirdML45.7%—
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4: 32.3 (#68), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
Terminal-Bench27.2%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard63%—
GDPval21.1%—
Cybench43%—
DeepResearch Bench47.3%—
BALROG43.6%—
LMArena Search1142—
METR Time Horizons66.6%—
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 36.7 (#65), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
Chess Puzzles28%21%
LMArena Hard Prompts14091403
Epoch Capabilities Index146.44143.98
ARC-AGI-216%—
SimpleBench60.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73.6%—
ARC-AGI-166.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
ForecastBench60.9—

Math Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 48.4 (#64), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584%84.4%
LMArena Math14221407
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)19.7%6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%0%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
Omni-MATH60.3%—

Knowledge Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 53.8 (#55), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
GPQA Diamond87%82.3%
LMArena Expert14151407
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
MMLU-Pro85.1%—
Confabulations12.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%
GPQA (HELM)72.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4: 33.7 (#94), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Vision1210—
GeoBench45%—

Multilingual Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 51.8 (#103), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English14031385
LMArena Chinese14271446
LMArena French14181412
LMArena German14291390
LMArena Japanese13941368
LMArena Korean13771344
LMArena Russian14101379
LMArena Spanish14201400

Instruction Following Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 79.2 (#5), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following13871374
IFEval94.9%—

Long Context Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 63.1 (#4), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query14091392
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%—

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Grok 4: 58.5 (#116), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkGrok 4Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text14111397
LMArena Creative Writing13971343
LMArena Multi-Turn14161393
Short-Story Creative Writing76.9%—
WildBench79.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4 or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Grok 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.3 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper