Model comparison
Grok Build 0.1 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Grok Build 0.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok Build 0.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok Build 0.1 leads 31.3 to 14.3.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $2 for Grok Build 0.1.
- Grok Build 0.1 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.8 | 28.6 |
| Released | 2026-04-16 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | 131K |
| Max output | 256K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1 | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 3 | 15 |
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), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 50.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
Grok Build 0.1: 22.5 (#122), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)
Reasoning Grok Build 0.1 leads
Grok Build 0.1: 31.3 (#73), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 9.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.44 |
Math Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok Build 0.1 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Grok Build 0.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok Build 0.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Grok Build 0.1 lists at $1 and $2.
Is Grok Build 0.1 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Grok Build 0.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok Build 0.1 does, with 256K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Grok Build 0.1 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok Build 0.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.