Model comparison
Grok 4.5 vs Llama 2-70B
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-70B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.5 leads 62.3 to 7.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 97.8% for Grok 4.5 and 0% for Llama 2-70B.
- Llama 2-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 55.0 | 24.4 |
| Released | 2026-07-08 | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 500K | — |
| Max output | 500K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | — |
| Results tracked | 52 | 35 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 52.2 (#35), Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1474 | 1079 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1553 | — |
| SciCode | 54.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 46.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,309 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#17), Llama 2-70B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 56.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 47.9% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 23.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.4% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1213 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,887 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 56.1 (#25), Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | 1073 |
| DTBench | 96.5% | 41.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.92 | 113.79 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 52.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 70% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 83.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 79.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.2% | — |
| CritPt | 15.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 36% | — |
| LMCA | 45.2% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 74.4% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 64.9% |
| CommonsenseQA 2.0 | — | 50% |
| ForecastBench | — | 51.4 |
| HellaSwag | — | 85.3% |
| LAMBADA | — | 78.9% |
| PIQA | — | 82.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.2% |
Math Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 60.9 (#35), Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | 0% |
| LMArena Math | 1459 | 1091 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 24.4% | — |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 3.3% |
| GSM8K | — | 69.6% |
Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#24), Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.4% | 26.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1466 | 1039 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48.3% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 78.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 88.6% |
| MMLU | — | 69.9% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 60.2% |
| TriviaQA | — | 87.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 37.6 (#72), Llama 2-70B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 27.3% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 54.4 (#42), Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1045 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1496 | 995 |
| LMArena French | 1456 | 1090 |
| LMArena German | 1446 | 1041 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1428 | 927 |
| LMArena Korean | 1404 | 964 |
| LMArena Russian | 1448 | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1450 | 1143 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 76.0 (#48), Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1446 | 1071 |
Long Context Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#56), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1062 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 65.8 (#42), Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1115 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | 1075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1088 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1579 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.5 better than Llama 2-70B?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.5 or Llama 2-70B better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Llama 2-70B share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-70B has 35.