Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4 vs QwQ-32B

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4 xAI

48.1

Rank #56 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 scores higher in 8 categories and QwQ-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4 leads 53.8 to 37.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 79.6% for Grok 4 and 20.9% for QwQ-32B.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4QwQ-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.139.8
Released2025-07-092024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked4836

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 50.3 (#46), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot79.6%20.9%
LMArena Coding14081333
WeirdML45.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4: 32.3 (#68), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
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: 36.7 (#65), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles28%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14091325
Epoch Capabilities Index146.44137.6
ForecastBench60.958.3
ARC-AGI-216%—
SimpleBench60.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73.6%—
ARC-AGI-166.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
LiveBench—72%

Math Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 48.4 (#64), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584%59.2%
LMArena Math14221359
Omni-MATH60.3%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)19.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 53.8 (#55), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond87%65.3%
Confabulations12.4%15.6%
LMArena Expert14151324
MMLU-Pro85.1%—
GPQA (HELM)72.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4: 33.7 (#94), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
LMArena Vision1210—
GeoBench45%—

Multilingual Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 51.8 (#103), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English14031305
LMArena Chinese14271378
LMArena French14181336
LMArena German14291313
LMArena Japanese13941262
LMArena Korean13771279
LMArena Russian14101297
LMArena Spanish14201354

Instruction Following Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 79.2 (#5), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following13871297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
IFEval94.9%—

Long Context Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 63.1 (#4), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench94.4%83.3%
LMArena Longer Query14091308

Writing & Preference Grok 4 leads

Grok 4: 58.5 (#116), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

BenchmarkGrok 4QwQ-32B
LMArena Text14111329
LMArena Creative Writing13971288
Short-Story Creative Writing76.9%80.2%
LMArena Multi-Turn14161314
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
WildBench79.7%—
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4 better than QwQ-32B?

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Grok 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.3 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4 and QwQ-32B share?

26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 has 48 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper