# Grok 4.7 vs Llama 2-70B

> Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 24.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-7-vs-llama-2-70b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-70B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.7 leads 70.1 to 32.5.
- Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 46.6 | 24.1 |
| Rank | 56 | 343 |
| Context | 500K | — |
| Input $/M | $2 | — |
| Output $/M | $6 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)
- Llama 2-70B: 30.8 (#281)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1423 | 1079 |
| CursorBench | 46.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1636 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | — |
| SciCode | 57.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)
- Llama 2-70B: 13.7 (#324)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1409 | 1073 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 76.8% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| DTBench | — | 41.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 64.9% |
| CommonsenseQA 2.0 | — | 50% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 113.59 |
| ForecastBench | — | 51.4 |
| HellaSwag | — | 85.3% |
| LAMBADA | — | 78.9% |
| PIQA | — | 82.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.2% |

## Math

- Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)
- Llama 2-70B: 7.5 (#320)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1393 | 1091 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 0% |
| ProofBench | 34% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 3.3% |
| GSM8K | — | 69.6% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)
- Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#305)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1413 | 1039 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 26.3% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 78.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 88.6% |
| MMLU | — | 69.9% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 60.2% |
| TriviaQA | — | 87.6% |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)
- Llama 2-70B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 20.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)
- Llama 2-70B: 27.9 (#269)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1392 | 1045 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1476 | 994 |
| LMArena Russian | 1396 | 1083 |
| LMArena French | — | 1089 |
| LMArena German | — | 1041 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 927 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 964 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1142 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)
- Llama 2-70B: 55.1 (#273)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1071 |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)
- Llama 2-70B: 32.2 (#265)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1062 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)
- Llama 2-70B: 32.5 (#274)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | 1115 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1391 | 1075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1088 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2007 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.7 better than Llama 2-70B?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 24.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4.7 or Llama 2-70B better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 30.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Llama 2-70B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.