# Grok 4 vs Llama 2-13B

> Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/grok-4-vs-llama-2-13b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-13B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Grok 4 leads 63.1 to 32.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 28% for Grok 4 and 0% for Llama 2-13B.
- Llama 2-13B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 48.1 | 29.6 |
| Rank | 56 | 309 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Grok 4: 50.3 (#46)
- Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1408 | 1062 |
| Aider Polyglot | 79.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 45.7% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Grok 4: 32.3 (#68)
- Llama 2-13B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 27.2% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 63% | — |
| GDPval | 21.1% | — |
| Cybench | 43% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 47.3% | — |
| BALROG | 43.6% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1142 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Grok 4: 36.7 (#65)
- Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 28% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1409 | 1051 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.44 | 106.17 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 16% | — |
| SimpleBench | 60.5% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 73.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 66.7% | — |
| DTBench | — | 42.2% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 58.2% |
| ForecastBench | 60.9 | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 80.7% |
| LAMBADA | — | 76.5% |
| PIQA | — | 80.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 72.8% |

## Math

- Grok 4: 48.4 (#64)
- Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1422 | 1065 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 84% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 60.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 19.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 36.9% |

## Knowledge

- Grok 4: 53.8 (#55)
- Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1415 | 1030 |
| GPQA Diamond | 87% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 85.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 72.7% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 60.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 82.4% |
| MMLU | — | 55.6% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 57% |
| TriviaQA | — | 79.6% |

## Multimodal

- Grok 4: 33.7 (#94)
- Llama 2-13B: —

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1210 | — |
| GeoBench | 45% | — |
| ScienceQA | — | 55.8% |

## Multilingual

- Grok 4: 51.8 (#103)
- Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1403 | 1024 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1001 |
| LMArena French | 1418 | 1044 |
| LMArena German | 1429 | 1009 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1394 | 894 |
| LMArena Korean | 1377 | 953 |
| LMArena Russian | 1410 | 1055 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1420 | 1087 |

## Instruction Following

- Grok 4: 79.2 (#5)
- Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1387 | 1045 |
| IFEval | 94.9% | — |

## Long Context

- Grok 4: 63.1 (#4)
- Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | 1064 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 94.4% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Grok 4: 58.5 (#116)
- Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289)

| Benchmark | Grok 4 | Llama 2-13B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1411 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1397 | 1047 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1416 | 1050 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.9% | — |
| WildBench | 79.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Grok 4 better than Llama 2-13B?

Grok 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.1 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Grok 4 or Llama 2-13B better for coding?

Grok 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.3 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Grok 4 and Llama 2-13B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-13B has 32.