# Grok 4.3 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

> Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 5.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-3-vs-qwen2-5-7b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 6

## Summary

- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.3 leads 52.5 to 17.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 93.3% for Grok 4.3 and 2.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.3.
- Grok 4.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.6 | 28.6 |
| Rank | 80 | 314 |
| Context | 1M | 131K |
| Input $/M | $1.25 | $0.17 |
| Output $/M | $2.50 | $0.70 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.3: 41.3 (#117)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1357 | — |
| SciCode | 47.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 49.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1415 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
| ALE-Bench | 944.17 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.3: 27.6 (#93)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
| GDP.pdf | 8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1165 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 35.26 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.3: 34.9 (#60)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 25% | 0% |
| DTBench | 90.7% | 47.7% |
| LMCA | 38.3% | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.13 | 118.44 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 55.2% | — |
| CritPt | 8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1397 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |

## Math

- Grok 4.3: 45.8 (#60)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | 2.5% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 42.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 14.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 11% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1388 | — |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#57)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 88.8% | 35.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.2% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1385 | — |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#96)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1231 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 0% | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.3: 50.7 (#114)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1423 | — |
| LMArena French | 1412 | — |
| LMArena German | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1357 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1399 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1402 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.3: 72.3 (#135)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1366 | — |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#118)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1393 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.3: 58.6 (#112)
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1380 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1075 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1406 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.3 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 5.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Grok 4.3 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 4.3 lists at $1.25 and $2.50.

### Is Grok 4.3 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.3 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.3 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.3 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.