Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen2.5-Max

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.6 xAI

56.9

Rank #21 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.7

Rank #146 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 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 4.6 leads 61.4 to 25.6.

Side by side

Grok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.940.7
Released2026-08-122025-01-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked4927

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 58.5 (#16), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Coding14651359
DeepSWE67.5%—
FrontierCode48%—
CursorBench41.4%—
LMArena WebDev1617—
FrontierSWE25.3%—
SciCode56.5%—
WeirdML67.3%—
LiveBench Coding—64.4%
ALE-Bench1,508—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
APEX-Agents65.3%—
GDP.pdf17.2%—
Vending-Bench 29,047—

Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14471360
Epoch Capabilities Index156.44132.53
ARC-AGI-267.1%—
SimpleBench75.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)80%—
ARC-AGI-187.5%—
CritPt19.7%—
Chess Puzzles40%—
EBR-Bench30.5%—
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.3%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
LMCA48.5%—
LiveBench—62.3%

Math Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Math14231369
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—
ProofBench51%—
LiveBench Math—58.4%

Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Expert14671337
GPQA Diamond94%—
SimpleQA Verified49.3%—
Confabulations—21.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23), Qwen2.5-Max: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 233.2%—
Furniture Assembly40%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English14201352
LMArena Chinese14801382
LMArena French14611396
LMArena German14311350
LMArena Japanese13761300
LMArena Korean13971304
LMArena Russian14221353
LMArena Spanish14041377

Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Instruction Following14311335
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%

Long Context Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query14541358

Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text14281367
LMArena Creative Writing14281339
LMArena Multi-Turn14251364
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.6 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.5 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Qwen2.5-Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper