# Grok 4.7 vs Qwen1.5-7B

> Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-7-vs-qwen1-5-7b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.7 leads 70.0 to 29.6.
- Qwen1.5-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 53.1 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 37 | 273 |
| Context | 500K | — |
| Input $/M | $2 | — |
| Output $/M | $6 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | 1107 |
| FrontierCode | 47.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 46.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1639 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | — |
| SciCode | 57.8% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37)
- Qwen1.5-7B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 54.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 22.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,537 | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1413 | 1065 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 76.8% | — |
| CritPt | 18% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 38% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 29% | — |
| DTBench | 96% | — |
| LMCA | 49.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.53 | — |

## Math

- Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1407 | 1080 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 53% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 34% | — |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1422 | 1055 |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 56% | — |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87)
- Qwen1.5-7B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1228 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 32.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 20.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1389 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | 1397 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1455 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1400 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1058 |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1413 | 1090 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1399 | 1083 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1391 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1393 | 1062 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2007 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen1.5-7B?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4.7 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.