Model comparison
Mistral Small 3.1 vs Qwen3 14B
Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.1 costs 1.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 14B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3 14B in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 14B leads 37.0 to 13.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 3.9% for Mistral Small 3.1 and 66.4% for Qwen3 14B.
- Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper at $0.35 / $0.56 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
- Qwen3 14B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 35.0 |
| Released | 2025-03-17 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 102K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.35 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.56 | $1.40 |
| Results tracked | 28 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Mistral Small 3.1: 37.7 (#175), Qwen3 14B: 36.7 (#191)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1309 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Mistral Small 3.1: —, Qwen3 14B: 29.4 (#78)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Mistral Small 3.1: 18.9 (#249), Qwen3 14B: 18.1 (#272)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 1% | 4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 127.48 | 138.23 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1278 | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
Math Qwen3 14B leads
Mistral Small 3.1: 13.7 (#295), Qwen3 14B: 37.0 (#102)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 3.9% | 66.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 24.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1261 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 14B leads
Mistral Small 3.1: 22.6 (#266), Qwen3 14B: 39.2 (#124)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 41.9% | 63.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 61% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39.2% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1258 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Mistral Small 3.1: 32.6 (#93), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1136 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mistral Small 3.1: 41.4 (#204), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1255 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1254 | — |
| LMArena French | 1270 | — |
| LMArena German | 1266 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1210 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1206 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1263 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1283 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mistral Small 3.1: 63.8 (#225), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 75% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1264 | — |
Long Context Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Mistral Small 3.1: 39.5 (#172), Qwen3 14B: 38.0 (#201)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1300 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mistral Small 3.1: 37.2 (#254), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.1 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1278 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1253 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 761 | — |
| WildBench | 78.8% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1270 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mistral Small 3.1 better than Qwen3 14B?
Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.1 costs 1.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 14B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Mistral Small 3.1 or Qwen3 14B?
Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $0.56 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.
Is Mistral Small 3.1 or Qwen3 14B better for coding?
Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 36.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 14B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Mistral Small 3.1 and Qwen3 14B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small 3.1 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.