Model comparison
Grok 4.5 vs Llama 2-7B
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.0 to 15.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 36% for Grok 4.5 and 0% for Llama 2-7B.
- Llama 2-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 55.0 | 28.6 |
| 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 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 51.7 (#34), Llama 2-7B: 28.7 (#302)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1473 | 1002 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1552 | — |
| SciCode | 54.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 46.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,309 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#15), Llama 2-7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 56.0 (#23), Llama 2-7B: 15.1 (#309)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 36% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1462 | 1009 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.02 | 98.54 |
| 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% | — |
| DTBench | 96.5% | — |
| LMCA | 45.2% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 74.4% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 39.2% |
| HellaSwag | — | 77.2% |
| LAMBADA | — | 73.3% |
| PIQA | — | 78.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 69.2% |
Math Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 60.7 (#29), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1457 | 1042 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 24.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 16.7% |
Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#21), Llama 2-7B: 27.7 (#243)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1466 | 1036 |
| GPQA Diamond | 93.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48.3% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 45.9% |
| BoolQ | — | 77.9% |
| MMLU | — | 45.8% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 58.6% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.5: 37.8 (#63), Llama 2-7B: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1287 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 27.3% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
| ScienceQA | — | 43.1% |
Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 54.5 (#43), Llama 2-7B: 23.9 (#288)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1497 | 973 |
| LMArena French | 1458 | 969 |
| LMArena German | 1448 | 978 |
| LMArena Russian | 1447 | 995 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1452 | 1007 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1425 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1402 | — |
Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 76.3 (#45), Llama 2-7B: 51.0 (#293)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1446 | 1006 |
Long Context Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#54), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#282)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 999 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads
Grok 4.5: 65.9 (#40), Llama 2-7B: 28.1 (#293)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.5 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | 1053 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | 1033 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1457 | 1029 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1579 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.5 better than Llama 2-7B?
Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Grok 4.5 or Llama 2-7B better for coding?
Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.7 versus 28.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Llama 2-7B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.