# Grok 4.7 vs Qwen2-72B

> Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-7-vs-qwen2-72b
- 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 Qwen2-72B 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 41.0.
- Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.6 | 29.5 |
| Rank | 56 | 294 |
| Context | 500K | — |
| Input $/M | $2 | — |
| Output $/M | $6 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4.7: 55.0 (#23)
- Qwen2-72B: 28.7 (#303)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1423 | 1196 |
| CursorBench | 46.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1636 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | — |
| SciCode | 57.4% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4.7: —
- Qwen2-72B: 16.9 (#138)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4.7: 40.1 (#49)
- Qwen2-72B: 22.2 (#184)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1409 | 1191 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 76.8% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.27 |

## Math

- Grok 4.7: 41.1 (#73)
- Qwen2-72B: 27.9 (#232)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1393 | 1235 |
| ProofBench | 34% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4.7: 38.7 (#130)
- Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#270)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1413 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4.7: 28.8 (#107)
- Qwen2-72B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 20.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4.7: 51.2 (#108)
- Qwen2-72B: 36.0 (#239)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1392 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1476 | 1240 |
| LMArena Russian | 1396 | 1169 |
| LMArena French | — | 1169 |
| LMArena German | — | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1168 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4.7: 74.3 (#98)
- Qwen2-72B: 62.0 (#236)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1181 |

## Long Context

- Grok 4.7: 43.2 (#97)
- Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#230)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1193 |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4.7: 70.1 (#23)
- Qwen2-72B: 41.0 (#236)

| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1391 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1195 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2007 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4.7 better than Qwen2-72B?

Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.6 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4.7 or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.0 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and Qwen2-72B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.