Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3 14B

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 14B costs 9.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 Anthropic

44.1

Rank #81 Confirmed

Qwen3 14B Alibaba (Qwen)

35.5

Rank #225 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3 14B in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 47.3 to 37.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 73.2% for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and 41% for Qwen3 14B.
  • Qwen3 14B is cheaper at $0.35 / $1.40 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.135.5
Released2025-09-292025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K131K
Max output64K8K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.35
Output $ / M tokens$15$1.40
Results tracked7312

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.3 (#61), Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
SciCode44.7%31.6%
SWE-bench Verified71.3%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)71.4%—
LMArena WebDev1393—
SWE-bench Multilingual67%—
GSO14.7%—
WeirdML47.7%—
LMArena Coding1489—
ALE-Bench796.15—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.3 (#32), Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard73.2%41%
Terminal-Bench46.5%—
GDPval42.5%—
Remote Labor Index2.1%—
τ²-bench Airline72%—
τ²-bench Banking25.3%—
τ²-bench Retail72.4%—
τ²-bench Telecom84.9%—
Cybench60%—
DeepResearch Bench52.6%—
OSWorld62.9%—
LMArena Search1159—
METR Time Horizons67.4%—
Vending-Bench 23,839—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#125), Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%49.1%
CritPt1.1%0%
Chess Puzzles12%4%
DTBench83.2%64%
LMCA38.8%18.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index146.84138.23
ARC-AGI-213.6%—
SimpleBench54.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)37.3%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
EnigmaEval6%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1462—
Mystery Game Puzzles17%—
ForecastBench61.9—

Math Qwen3 14B leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 32.3 (#216), Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%66.4%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)23.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
ProofBench19%—
Omni-MATH55.3%—
LMArena Math1449—
MATH Level 597.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)15.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#76), Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
GPQA Diamond82.3%63.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%5.4%
Humanity's Last Exam13.7%—
SimpleQA Verified30.7%—
MMLU-Pro86.9%—
GPQA (HELM)68.6%—
LMArena Expert1482—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.8 (#89), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
VPCT39.8%—
LMArena Document1450—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.4 (#69), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
LMArena Non-English1425—
LMArena Chinese1459—
LMArena French1458—
LMArena German1427—
LMArena Japanese1390—
LMArena Korean1403—
LMArena Russian1437—
LMArena Spanish1457—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.0 (#78), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
IFEval85%—
LMArena Instruction Following1459—

Long Context Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#46), Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.5%
LMArena Longer Query1476—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.5 (#34), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3 14B
LMArena Text1439—
LMArena Creative Writing1442—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1678—
WildBench85.4%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1465—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than Qwen3 14B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 14B costs 9.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $1.40 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.3 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen3 14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper