Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.6 vs Qwen2-72B

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.6 xAI

56.9

Rank #21 Confirmed

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #300 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Grok 4.6 leads 63.3 to 21.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 67.3% for Grok 4.6 and 11.3% for Qwen2-72B.
  • Qwen2-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.6Qwen2-72B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.930.0
Released2026-08-122024-06-07
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked4926

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), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
WeirdML67.3%11.3%
LMArena Coding14651196
DeepSWE67.5%—
FrontierCode48%—
CursorBench41.4%—
LMArena WebDev1617—
FrontierSWE25.3%—
SciCode56.5%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.5%
BigCodeBench Complete—54%
ALE-Bench1,508—

Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
APEX-Agents65.3%—
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
GDP.pdf17.2%—
METR Time Horizons—29.9%
Vending-Bench 29,047—

Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts14471191
Epoch Capabilities Index156.44125.28
ARC-AGI-267.1%—
SimpleBench75.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)80%—
ARC-AGI-187.5%—
CritPt19.7%—
Chess Puzzles40%—
EBR-Bench30.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.3%—
LMCA48.5%—

Math Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
LMArena Math14231235
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—
ProofBench51%—
MATH Level 5—39.1%

Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
GPQA Diamond94%40.8%
LMArena Expert14671171
SimpleQA Verified49.3%—
MMLU—82.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23), Qwen2-72B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 233.2%—
Furniture Assembly40%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English14201176
LMArena Chinese14801240
LMArena French14611170
LMArena German14311151
LMArena Japanese13761111
LMArena Korean13971083
LMArena Russian14221169
LMArena Spanish14041169

Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following14311181

Long Context Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query14541192

Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6Qwen2-72B
LMArena Text14281203
LMArena Creative Writing14281181
LMArena Multi-Turn14251196

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Qwen2-72B?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.6 or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.5 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Qwen2-72B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper