Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.5 vs Qwen2.5-Max

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.5 xAI

55.0

Rank #22 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.1

Rank #142 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.5 leads 56.0 to 24.6.

Side by side

Grok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index55.040.1
Released2026-07-082025-01-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked5227

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), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Coding14731359
DeepSWE53.8%—
FrontierCode42.4%—
LMArena WebDev1552—
SciCode54.1%—
WeirdML46.4%—
LiveBench Coding—64.4%
ALE-Bench1,309—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 44.4 (#15), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
APEX-Agents56.2%—
τ²-bench Banking47.9%—
PostTrainBench23.4%—
GBAEval65.4%—
GDP.pdf14%—
LMArena Search1213—
Vending-Bench 23,887—

Reasoning Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 56.0 (#23), Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14621360
Epoch Capabilities Index154.02132.54
ARC-AGI-252.6%—
SimpleBench70%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.9%—
ARC-AGI-187.2%—
CritPt15.4%—
Chess Puzzles36%—
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
DTBench96.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
LMCA45.2%—
Surface Evolver Bench74.4%—
LiveBench—62.3%

Math Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 60.7 (#29), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Math14571369
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)57.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 424.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
ProofBench31%—
LiveBench Math—58.4%

Knowledge Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 62.3 (#21), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Expert14661337
GPQA Diamond93.4%—
SimpleQA Verified48.3%—
Confabulations—21.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.5: 37.8 (#63), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Vision1287—
Blueprint-Bench 227.3%—
Furniture Assembly22.5%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 54.5 (#43), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English14391352
LMArena Chinese14971382
LMArena French14581396
LMArena German14481350
LMArena Japanese14251299
LMArena Korean14021304
LMArena Russian14471353
LMArena Spanish14521377

Instruction Following Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 76.3 (#45), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Instruction Following14461335
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%

Long Context Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 44.8 (#54), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query14631358

Writing & Preference Grok 4.5 leads

Grok 4.5: 65.9 (#40), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)

BenchmarkGrok 4.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text14481367
LMArena Creative Writing14421339
LMArena Multi-Turn14571364
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1579—
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.5 better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Grok 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 55.0 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.5 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Grok 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.7 versus 41.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.5 and Qwen2.5-Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.5 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper