# Grok-2 (Dec 2024) vs Qwen-14B

> Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-2-vs-qwen-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen-14B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads 48.6 to 27.6.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.7 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 239 | 275 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 33.3 (#258)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1287 | 1071 |
| WeirdML | 22.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 46.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 16.9 (#299)
- Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1272 | 1027 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.48 | 113.03 |
| SimpleBench | 22.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 54.8% | — |
| DTBench | 65.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 54.5% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |

## Math

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 20.8 (#284)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1283 | 1068 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 11.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 54.9% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 63.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0.7% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |

## Knowledge

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 29.8 (#233)
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 53.8% | — |
| Confabulations | 20.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1254 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |

## Multilingual

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 43.1 (#188)
- Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1282 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1289 | 1077 |
| LMArena French | 1318 | — |
| LMArena German | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1244 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1237 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1286 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1281 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 66.9 (#202)
- Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1270 | 1031 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 38.8 (#190)
- Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1276 | 1028 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 48.6 (#198)
- Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1305 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1284 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1290 | 1022 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 63.6% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 45.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) better than Qwen-14B?

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) or Qwen-14B better for coding?

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.3 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok-2 (Dec 2024) and Qwen-14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.