Model comparison

Grok Build 0.1 vs QwQ-32B

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Grok Build 0.1 xAI

36.4

Rank #216 Reported

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok Build 0.1 leads 32.2 to 23.7.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok Build 0.1 and QwQ-32B specifications
Grok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.439.8
Released2026-04-162024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window256K—
Max output256K—
Input $ / M tokens$1—
Output $ / M tokens$2—
Results tracked336

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: 43.1 (#91), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
SciCode50.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
LMArena Coding—1333
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: 22.7 (#129), QwQ-32B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
GBAEval2.4%—

Reasoning Grok Build 0.1 leads

Grok Build 0.1: 32.2 (#77), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
CritPt9.1%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1325
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
Epoch Capabilities Index—137.6
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—59.2%
LiveBench Math—77.8%
LMArena Math—1359

Knowledge Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond—65.3%
Confabulations—15.6%
LMArena Expert—1324

Multilingual Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English—1305
LMArena Chinese—1378
LMArena French—1336
LMArena German—1313
LMArena Japanese—1262
LMArena Korean—1279
LMArena Russian—1297
LMArena Spanish—1354

Instruction Following Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%
LMArena Instruction Following—1297

Long Context Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%
LMArena Longer Query—1308

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Grok Build 0.1: —, QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGrok Build 0.1QwQ-32B
LMArena Text—1329
LMArena Creative Writing—1288
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
LMArena Multi-Turn—1314
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok Build 0.1 better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.8 to 36.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok Build 0.1 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Grok Build 0.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.1 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok Build 0.1 and QwQ-32B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok Build 0.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper