Terence Chi-Shen Tao vs Évariste Galois
Terence Chi-Shen Tao (IQ 220) vs Évariste Galois (IQ 165). Side-by-side comparison of intellect, achievements, era and cultural impact.
| Born | 1975 | 1811 |
|---|---|---|
| Died | — | 1832 |
| Country | AU | FR |
| Estimated IQ | 220 | 165 |
| Best known for | When he was two years old, he was able to perform simple arithmetic. By the time he was nine, he was studying college-level math courses. And in 1988, aged just 13, he became the… | Work on the theory of equations and Abelian integrals |
Who had the higher IQ?
By the most cited estimates, Terence Chi-Shen Tao tops this matchup with an estimated IQ of 220, a 55-point margin over Évariste Galois (165). IQ estimates for historical figures are reconstructions, not test results — they sit on top of biographical evidence, productivity, and the difficulty of the problems each person solved. Treat the number as a directional signal, not a verdict.
Achievements compared
Terence Chi-Shen Tao is best known for: When he was two years old, he was able to perform simple arithmetic. By the time he was nine, he was studying college-level math courses. And in 1988, aged just 13, he became the… Évariste Galois is best known for: Work on the theory of equations and Abelian integrals
Recognition. Terence Chi-Shen Tao: Salem Prize (2000) • Bôcher Memorial Prize (2002) • Clay Research Award (2003) • Australian Mathematical Society Medal (2005) • Ostrowski Prize (2005) • Levi L. Conant Prize (2005) MacArthur Award (2006) • SASTRA Ramanujan Prize (2006) • Sloan Fellowship (2006) • Fellow of the Royal Society (2007) •. Évariste Galois: —.
Different eras, different boards
The two were born roughly 164 years apart (1975 vs 1811), which matters: scientific tools, available knowledge, and intellectual culture compound. Comparing minds across eras is comparing players on different boards.
The verdict
So who was greater? The honest answer: they're not strictly comparable. By raw IQ proxy, Terence Chi-Shen Tao edges out. By measurable, lasting influence in their respective field, both are anchors of the human record. If you have to pick one to bet civilization on, pick the one working on the problem you care about.