Model comparison

o1-mini vs Qwen-14B

o1-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

o1-mini OpenAI

34.0

Rank #235 Confirmed

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #275 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. o1-mini scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen-14B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where o1-mini leads 48.4 to 27.6.
  • Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

o1-mini and Qwen-14B specifications
o1-miniQwen-14B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index34.031.4
Released2024-09-122023-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked3918

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

Category by category

Coding o1-mini leads

o1-mini: 35.5 (#224), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
LMArena Coding13621071
Aider Polyglot32.9%—
WeirdML36.3%—
LiveBench Coding48%—
HumanEval+89%—
MBPP+78.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o1-mini: 24.6 (#118), Qwen-14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
Cybench10%—

Reasoning Qwen-14B leads

o1-mini: 8.8 (#346), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts13331027
Epoch Capabilities Index135.82113.03
ARC-AGI-20.8%—
SimpleBench18.1%—
ARC-AGI-114%—
LiveBench Reasoning72.3%—
LiveBench Data Analysis57.9%—
BIG-Bench Hard—55%
LAMBADA—71.1%
LiveBench57.8%—
PIQA—79.9%

Math o1-mini leads

o1-mini: 35.4 (#186), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
LMArena Math13581068
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202546.9%—
LiveBench Math62%—
MATH Level 589.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1.7%—
GSM8K—61.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

o1-mini: 34.9 (#192), Qwen-14B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
GPQA Diamond62.4%—
Confabulations18.6%—
LMArena Expert1316—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—84.4%
BoolQ—86.2%
MMLU—66.3%

Multilingual o1-mini leads

o1-mini: 43.6 (#182), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
LMArena Non-English12891041
LMArena Chinese13141077
LMArena French1293—
LMArena German1278—
LMArena Japanese1245—
LMArena Korean1223—
LMArena Russian1283—
LMArena Spanish1303—

Instruction Following o1-mini leads

o1-mini: 66.7 (#206), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
LMArena Instruction Following13041031
LiveBench Instruction Following65.4%—

Long Context o1-mini leads

o1-mini: 40.1 (#161), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
LMArena Longer Query13201028

Writing & Preference o1-mini leads

o1-mini: 48.4 (#202), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarko1-miniQwen-14B
LMArena Text13171051
LMArena Creative Writing12441028
LMArena Multi-Turn13141022
Short-Story Creative Writing64.9%—
LiveBench Language40.9%—

Frequently asked questions

Is o1-mini better than Qwen-14B?

o1-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.0 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is o1-mini or Qwen-14B better for coding?

o1-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.5 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do o1-mini and Qwen-14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1-mini has 39 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper