# Grok-2 (Dec 2024) vs Qwen1.5-72B

> Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-2-vs-qwen1-5-72b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-72B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok-2 (Dec 2024) leads 29.8 to 11.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 53.8% for Grok-2 (Dec 2024) and 28.8% for Qwen1.5-72B.
- Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.4 | 30.3 |
| Rank | 233 | 282 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 32.9 (#254)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 31.4 (#272)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1288 | 1166 |
| WeirdML | 22.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | 46.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |

## Reasoning

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 16.4 (#294)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 21.2 (#201)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1272 | 1148 |
| SimpleBench | 22.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 54.8% | — |
| DTBench | 65.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 54.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.48 | — |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |

## Math

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 19.6 (#278)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 30.7 (#205)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1283 | 1164 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 11.5% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 54.9% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 63.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 29.8 (#225)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#295)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 53.8% | 28.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1254 | 1136 |
| Confabulations | 20.1% | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 43.3 (#183)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 33.4 (#248)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1282 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1289 | 1186 |
| LMArena French | 1317 | 1158 |
| LMArena German | 1287 | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1244 | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | 1237 | 1049 |
| LMArena Russian | 1286 | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1281 | 1110 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 67.1 (#197)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 59.6 (#251)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1270 | 1142 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 38.7 (#186)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 35.0 (#238)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1276 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok-2 (Dec 2024): 48.8 (#192)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 37.4 (#253)

| Benchmark | Grok-2 (Dec 2024) | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1305 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1284 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1290 | 1160 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 63.6% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 45.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) better than Qwen1.5-72B?

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.4 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok-2 (Dec 2024) or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?

Grok-2 (Dec 2024) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.9 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok-2 (Dec 2024) and Qwen1.5-72B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok-2 (Dec 2024) has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.