Model comparison
Grok Build 0.1 vs Qwen-14B
Grok Build 0.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok Build 0.1 leads 31.3 to 18.7.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.8 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2026-04-16 | 2023-09-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | — |
| Max output | 256K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Results tracked | 3 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok Build 0.1 leads
Grok Build 0.1: 42.5 (#90), Qwen-14B: 30.6 (#283)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 50.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1072 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: 22.5 (#122), Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| GBAEval | 2.4% | — |
Reasoning Grok Build 0.1 leads
Grok Build 0.1: 31.3 (#73), Qwen-14B: 18.7 (#255)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 9.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1027 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 112.8 |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
Math Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen-14B: 28.7 (#224)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1068 |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen-14B: —
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen-14B: 27.7 (#270)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1042 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1077 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen-14B: 52.6 (#284)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1031 |
Long Context Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#276)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1029 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen-14B: 27.8 (#294)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1022 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok Build 0.1 better than Qwen-14B?
Grok Build 0.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen-14B better for coding?
Grok Build 0.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok Build 0.1 and Qwen-14B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok Build 0.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.