Noometry

Model comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Qwen-14B

Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude 3.5 Haiku Anthropic

29.2

Rank #315 Confirmed

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #275 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Haiku scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen-14B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen-14B leads 31.2 to 14.7.
  • Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.231.4
Released2024-10-222023-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked4918

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

Category by category

Coding Claude 3.5 Haiku leads

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 32.9 (#265), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Coding12861071
Aider Polyglot28%—
SciCode27.4%—
WeirdML30.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct46.1%—
LiveBench Coding51.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete59%—
CadEval32%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 28.0 (#95), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
BALROG19.3%—

Reasoning Qwen-14B leads

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 17.7 (#290), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts12511027
Epoch Capabilities Index127.15113.03
CritPt0%—
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench56.7%—
LiveBench Data Analysis48.5%—
BIG-Bench Hard—55%
LAMBADA—71.1%
LiveBench43.5%—
PIQA—79.9%

Math Qwen-14B leads

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 14.7 (#300), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Math12441068
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20254.3%—
Omni-MATH22.4%—
LiveBench Math35.5%—
MATH Level 546.4%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)0.3%—
GSM8K—61.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 18.7 (#281), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
MMLU74.3%66.3%
GPQA Diamond38.1%—
MMLU-Pro60.5%—
Confabulations36.7%—
GPQA (HELM)36.3%—
LMArena Expert1208—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—84.4%
BoolQ—86.2%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 26.8 (#117), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Vision1092—
GeoBench34%—

Multilingual Claude 3.5 Haiku leads

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 40.0 (#218), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Non-English12381041
LMArena Chinese12291077
LMArena French1264—
LMArena German1237—
LMArena Japanese1175—
LMArena Korean1173—
LMArena Russian1253—
LMArena Spanish1261—

Instruction Following Claude 3.5 Haiku leads

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 62.9 (#234), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Instruction Following12411031
LiveBench Instruction Following61.9%—
IFEval79.2%—

Long Context Claude 3.5 Haiku leads

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 38.3 (#200), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Longer Query12611028

Writing & Preference Claude 3.5 Haiku leads

Claude 3.5 Haiku: 42.7 (#234), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

BenchmarkClaude 3.5 HaikuQwen-14B
LMArena Text12551051
LMArena Creative Writing12331028
LMArena Multi-Turn12651022
Short-Story Creative Writing73.5%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1146—
WildBench76%—
LiveBench Language35.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 3.5 Haiku better than Qwen-14B?

Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 3.5 Haiku or Qwen-14B better for coding?

Claude 3.5 Haiku scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.9 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Haiku and Qwen-14B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Haiku has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper