Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 vs Qwen1.5-14B

GPT-4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

GPT-4.1 OpenAI

35.9

Rank #219 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.7

Rank #253 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GPT-4.1 leads 57.6 to 33.6.
  • Qwen1.5-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index35.932.7
Released2025-04-142024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output33K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$8—
Results tracked5217

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 34.4 (#238), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Coding13911138
SWE-bench Verified48.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)39.6%—
Aider Polyglot52.4%—
WeirdML39%—
CadEval42%—
ALE-Bench558.1—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 34.7 (#43), Qwen1.5-14B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard54%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-14B leads

GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#339), Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts13841113
ARC-AGI-20.4%—
SimpleBench27%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.3%—
ARC-AGI-15.5%—
Chess Puzzles6%—
EnigmaEval2.2%—
DTBench68.3%—
LMCA25.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index136.78—
ForecastBench61.5—

Math Qwen1.5-14B leads

GPT-4.1: 22.3 (#280), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Math13701125
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202538.3%—
Omni-MATH47.1%—
MATH Level 583%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)5.5%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 37.1 (#160), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Expert13641094
GPQA Diamond66.9%—
Humanity's Last Exam5.4%—
SimpleQA Verified31.1%—
MMLU-Pro81.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.6%—
GPQA (HELM)65.9%—
MMLU—68.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-4.1: 38.2 (#67), Qwen1.5-14B: —

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Vision1211—
GeoBench72%—

Multilingual GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 49.4 (#133), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Non-English13701095
LMArena Chinese13821147
LMArena French13821116
LMArena German13811043
LMArena Japanese13191019
LMArena Russian13771046
LMArena Spanish13761085
LMArena Korean1339—

Instruction Following GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 71.3 (#153), Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Instruction Following13671102
IFEval83.8%—

Long Context GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#163), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Longer Query13851113
Fiction.LiveBench63.9%—

Writing & Preference GPT-4.1 leads

GPT-4.1: 57.6 (#125), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276)

BenchmarkGPT-4.1Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Text13831128
LMArena Creative Writing13631091
LMArena Multi-Turn13981110
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1420—
WildBench85.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4.1 better than Qwen1.5-14B?

GPT-4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is GPT-4.1 or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

GPT-4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.4 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 and Qwen1.5-14B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper