Model comparison

Mixtral 8x22B vs Qwen1.5-14B

Qwen1.5-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.1 to 26.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Mixtral 8x22B Mistral AI

26.7

Rank #330 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.1

Rank #250 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Mixtral 8x22B scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen1.5-14B leads 29.3 to 15.1.

Side by side

Mixtral 8x22B and Qwen1.5-14B specifications
Mixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index26.732.1
Released2024-04-172024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window64K—
Max output64K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$6—
Results tracked3417

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen1.5-14B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 23.8 (#324), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.5 (#259)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Coding11661138
WeirdML3.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct40.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete50.2%—
HumanEval+72%—
MBPP+64.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mixtral 8x22B: 22.8 (#119), Qwen1.5-14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
Cybench7.5%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-14B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 19.1 (#246), Qwen1.5-14B: 20.5 (#217)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts11501113
DTBench55.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122—
ForecastBench56.3—

Math Qwen1.5-14B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 21.2 (#271), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.9 (#214)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Math11841125
Omni-MATH16.3%—
MATH Level 524.2%—

Knowledge Qwen1.5-14B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#288), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.3 (#230)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Expert11131094
MMLU77.8%68.6%
GPQA Diamond34.1%—
MMLU-Pro46%—
GPQA (HELM)33.4%—

Multilingual Mixtral 8x22B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 32.9 (#250), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.8 (#257)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Non-English11281095
LMArena Chinese11161147
LMArena French11651115
LMArena German11411043
LMArena Japanese10371019
LMArena Russian11581046
LMArena Spanish11501085
LMArena Korean1056—

Instruction Following Too close to call

Mixtral 8x22B: 57.9 (#261), Qwen1.5-14B: 57.1 (#266)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Instruction Following11471102
IFEval72.4%—

Long Context Too close to call

Mixtral 8x22B: 34.6 (#242), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#252)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Longer Query11441113

Writing & Preference Mixtral 8x22B leads

Mixtral 8x22B: 37.1 (#257), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#270)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMixtral 8x22BQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Text11621128
LMArena Creative Writing11411091
LMArena Multi-Turn11301110
WildBench71.1%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Mixtral 8x22B better than Qwen1.5-14B?

Qwen1.5-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.1 to 26.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Mixtral 8x22B or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.5 versus 23.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Mixtral 8x22B and Qwen1.5-14B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mixtral 8x22B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper