Noometry

Model comparison

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3 14B

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.0 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning NVIDIA

40.0

Rank #155 Confirmed

Qwen3 14B Alibaba (Qwen)

35.5

Rank #225 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads 26.8 to 18.5.
  • Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
  • Nemotron 3.5 Lightning accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Nemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
ProviderNVIDIAAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.035.5
Released2026-08-112025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K131K
Max output262K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.05$0.35
Output $ / M tokens$0.20$1.40
Results tracked1812

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

Category by category

Coding Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 40.4 (#141), Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
SciCode—31.6%
LMArena Coding1375—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: —, Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—41%

Reasoning Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 26.8 (#127), Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
Kagi LLM Benchmark—49.1%
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—4%
LMArena Hard Prompts1337—
DTBench—64%
LMCA—18.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—138.23

Math Qwen3 14B leads

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 37.5 (#155), Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—66.4%
LMArena Math1359—

Knowledge Qwen3 14B leads

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 37.5 (#154), Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
GPQA Diamond—63.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.4%
LMArena Expert1356—

Multilingual Not comparable

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 44.0 (#180), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
LMArena Non-English1295—
LMArena Chinese1359—
LMArena French1366—
LMArena German1282—
LMArena Japanese1206—
LMArena Korean1238—
LMArena Russian1253—
LMArena Spanish1345—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 69.6 (#170), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1318—

Long Context Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 39.9 (#165), Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.5%
LMArena Longer Query1314—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: 48.5 (#201), Qwen3 14B: —

BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 14B
LMArena Text1327—
LMArena Creative Writing1254—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1280—
LMArena Multi-Turn1328—

Frequently asked questions

Is Nemotron 3.5 Lightning better than Qwen3 14B?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.0 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3 14B?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.

Is Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning does, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen3 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper