Noometry

Model comparison

phi-3-medium 14B vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

phi-3-medium 14B Microsoft

29.7

Rank #306 Reported

Qwen3.6 Max Preview Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #43 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. phi-3-medium 14B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 57.6 to 9.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 27.6% for phi-3-medium 14B and 87.4% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
  • phi-3-medium 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

phi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
ProviderMicrosoftAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.751.5
Released2024-04-232026-04-20
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—262K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.30
Output $ / M tokens—$7.80
Results tracked1329

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.7 (#54)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
SWE-bench Verified—76.7%
LMArena WebDev—1482
BigCodeBench Instruct37.6%—
LMArena Coding—1471
BigCodeBench Complete48.7%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

phi-3-medium 14B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
Vending-Bench 2—4,254

Reasoning Not comparable

phi-3-medium 14B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 41.7 (#53)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
Epoch Capabilities Index121.23149.24
SimpleBench—63%
NYT Connections (extended)—74.1%
Chess Puzzles—20%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1457
Mystery Game Puzzles—19%
DTBench—87.2%
LMCA—42.5%
Adversarial NLI55.8%—
BIG-Bench Hard81.4%—
HellaSwag82.4%—
WinoGrande81.5%—

Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.1 (#46)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—91.1%
LMArena Math—1465
MATH Level 517.6%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—23.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—4.2%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads

phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#39)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
GPQA Diamond27.6%87.4%
SimpleQA Verified—52%
LMArena Expert—1478
ARC (AI2) Challenge91.6%—
MMLU78%—
OpenBookQA87.4%—
TriviaQA73.9%—

Multilingual Not comparable

phi-3-medium 14B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.2 (#48)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Non-English—1437
LMArena Chinese—1487
LMArena French—1449
LMArena Russian—1445
LMArena Spanish—1454

Instruction Following Not comparable

phi-3-medium 14B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.7 (#55)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Instruction Following—1438

Long Context Not comparable

phi-3-medium 14B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#61)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Longer Query—1457

Writing & Preference Not comparable

phi-3-medium 14B: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 63.8 (#60)

Benchmarkphi-3-medium 14BQwen3.6 Max Preview
LMArena Text—1447
LMArena Creative Writing—1435
LMArena Multi-Turn—1456

Frequently asked questions

Is phi-3-medium 14B better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is phi-3-medium 14B or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?

Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do phi-3-medium 14B and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. phi-3-medium 14B has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper