Model comparison
Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen3 14B
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3 14B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Haiku 5.5 leads 73.6 to 38.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.9% for Claude Haiku 5.5 and 66.4% for Qwen3 14B.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
- Claude Haiku 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 49.5 | 35.5 |
| Released | 2026-10-07 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 131K |
| Max output | 128K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $1.40 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 49.2 (#50), Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1587 | — |
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: —, Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |
Reasoning Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 35.2 (#69), Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 65.7% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 30% | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.23 |
Math Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 73.6 (#18), Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.9% | 66.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 75.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46.3% | — |
Knowledge Claude Haiku 5.5 leads
Claude Haiku 5.5: 50.8 (#70), Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.6% | 63.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 23.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: 43.7 (#21), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 47.5% | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Haiku 5.5: —, Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 5.5 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 better than Qwen3 14B?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.5 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or Qwen3 14B?
Claude Haiku 5.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 or Qwen3 14B better for coding?
Claude Haiku 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.2 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Haiku 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Haiku 5.5 and Qwen3 14B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Haiku 5.5 has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.