Noometry

Model comparison

Grok 4.6 vs QwQ-32B

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Grok 4.6 xAI

56.9

Rank #21 Confirmed

QwQ-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

39.8

Rank #159 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 7 categories and QwQ-32B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.4 to 23.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 99.2% for Grok 4.6 and 59.2% for QwQ-32B.
  • QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Grok 4.6QwQ-32B
ProviderxAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index56.939.8
Released2026-08-122024-11-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window500K—
Max output500K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked4936

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), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
LMArena Coding14651333
DeepSWE67.5%—
FrontierCode48%—
Aider Polyglot—20.9%
CursorBench41.4%—
LMArena WebDev1617—
FrontierSWE25.3%—
SciCode56.5%—
WeirdML67.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—44.6%
LiveBench Coding—72.2%
BigCodeBench Complete—54.4%
ALE-Bench1,508—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#27), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
APEX-Agents65.3%—
GDP.pdf17.2%—
Vending-Bench 29,047—

Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 61.4 (#20), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
Chess Puzzles40%5%
LMArena Hard Prompts14471325
Epoch Capabilities Index156.44137.6
ARC-AGI-267.1%—
SimpleBench75.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)80%—
ARC-AGI-187.5%—
CritPt19.7%—
EBR-Bench30.5%—
LiveBench Reasoning—83.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles34%—
DTBench97.3%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—65%
LMCA48.5%—
ForecastBench—58.3
LiveBench—72%

Math Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 67.0 (#24), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%59.2%
LMArena Math14231359
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
ProofBench51%—
LiveBench Math—77.8%

Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#20), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
GPQA Diamond94%65.3%
LMArena Expert14671324
SimpleQA Verified49.3%—
Confabulations—15.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Grok 4.6: 43.6 (#23), QwQ-32B: —

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
LMArena Vision1263—
Blueprint-Bench 233.2%—
Furniture Assembly40%—
LMArena Document1452—

Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 53.0 (#74), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
LMArena Non-English14201305
LMArena Chinese14801378
LMArena French14611336
LMArena German14311313
LMArena Japanese13761262
LMArena Korean13971279
LMArena Russian14221297
LMArena Spanish14041354

Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 75.4 (#63), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14311297
LiveBench Instruction Following—81.8%

Long Context QwQ-32B leads

Grok 4.6: 44.5 (#66), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
LMArena Longer Query14541308
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads

Grok 4.6: 62.3 (#80), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)

BenchmarkGrok 4.6QwQ-32B
LMArena Text14281329
LMArena Creative Writing14281288
LMArena Multi-Turn14251314
Short-Story Creative Writing—80.2%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1257
LiveBench Language—51.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than QwQ-32B?

Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.9 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Grok 4.6 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.5 versus 35.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and QwQ-32B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper