Skip to content
ModelCap

Model decision surface

Compare AI models

Start with EXAONE 4.0.1 32B and Fara1.5 4B, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.

Current public data

EXAONE 4.0.1 32B vs Fara1.5 4B

Live dataset updated 9/13/2026, 2:40:29 PM UTC

Open 1200×630 evidence receipt
Factual comparison of EXAONE 4.0.1 32B and Fara1.5 4B
Field
EXAONE 4.0.1 32B

LGAI EXAONE

Fara1.5 4B

Microsoft

ModelCap position#122#119
Index score36.937.5
EvidenceEstimatedglobal-corpus-prior over 186 held-out anchors (9%); launch card against 7 resolved peers on 8 rows (91%); optimism haircut 0 from cross-lab-probe; shrunk 1.5 up toward the measured corpusInheritedfinetune of Qwen/Qwen3.5-4B · finetune (100%)
Input / 1MUnavailableUnavailable
Output / 1MUnavailableUnavailable
Pricing statusunavailableunavailable
Context——
Providers00
Weight accessRestricted licenseOpen weights

Decision facts

  • EXAONE 4.0.1 32B is #122; Fara1.5 4B is #119 on the same current language board.
  • Index scores are 36.9 for EXAONE 4.0.1 32B and 37.5 for Fara1.5 4B. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
  • Evidence differs: EXAONE 4.0.1 32B is Estimated; Fara1.5 4B is Inherited.
  • Weight access differs: EXAONE 4.0.1 32B is restricted; Fara1.5 4B is open.

These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.

Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.