Model comparison

Phi-4 vs Qwen-14B

Phi-4 and Qwen-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.2 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Phi-4 Microsoft

31.2

Rank #279 Confirmed

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #275 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Phi-4 scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen-14B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Phi-4 leads 40.5 to 27.6.

Side by side

Phi-4 and Qwen-14B specifications
Phi-4Qwen-14B
ProviderMicrosoftAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.231.4
Released2024-12-112023-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.07—
Output $ / M tokens$0.14—
Results tracked3718

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

Category by category

Coding Phi-4 leads

Phi-4: 34.4 (#239), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
LMArena Coding12311071
BigCodeBench Instruct45.5%—
LiveBench Coding30.7%—
BigCodeBench Complete55.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Phi-4: 22.8 (#128), Qwen-14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard28.8%—
BALROG11.6%—

Reasoning Qwen-14B leads

Phi-4: 17.7 (#291), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts12201027
Epoch Capabilities Index130.42113.03
Chess Puzzles1%—
LiveBench Reasoning47.8%—
LiveBench Data Analysis45.2%—
BIG-Bench Hard—55%
LAMBADA—71.1%
LiveBench41.6%—
PIQA—79.9%

Math Qwen-14B leads

Phi-4: 20.8 (#285), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
LMArena Math12461068
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202513.8%—
LiveBench Math42%—
MATH Level 564.9%—
GSM8K—61.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

Phi-4: 32.6 (#209), Qwen-14B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
MMLU84.8%66.3%
GPQA Diamond56.1%—
Confabulations29.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate3.7%—
LMArena Expert1203—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—84.4%
BoolQ—86.2%

Multilingual Phi-4 leads

Phi-4: 37.2 (#237), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
LMArena Non-English11971041
LMArena Chinese12121077
LMArena French1224—
LMArena German1222—
LMArena Japanese1158—
LMArena Korean1151—
LMArena Russian1209—
LMArena Spanish1234—

Instruction Following Phi-4 leads

Phi-4: 60.4 (#251), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
LMArena Instruction Following12011031
LiveBench Instruction Following58.4%—

Long Context Phi-4 leads

Phi-4: 36.9 (#226), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
LMArena Longer Query12171028

Writing & Preference Phi-4 leads

Phi-4: 40.5 (#244), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Qwen-14B
LMArena Text12171051
LMArena Creative Writing11821028
LMArena Multi-Turn12061022
Short-Story Creative Writing62.6%—
LiveBench Language25.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Phi-4 better than Qwen-14B?

Phi-4 and Qwen-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.2 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is Phi-4 or Qwen-14B better for coding?

Phi-4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.4 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Phi-4 and Qwen-14B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-4 has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper