Model comparison
Qwen-14B vs Qwen3.5-9B
Qwen3.5-9B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen-14B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-9B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5-9B leads 33.5 to 28.7.
Side by side
| Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 33.3 |
| Released | 2023-09-24 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.5-9B leads
Qwen-14B: 30.6 (#283), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.3 (#213)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 27.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1072 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen-14B: —, Qwen3.5-9B: 14.4 (#143)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 9.2% |
Reasoning Qwen3.5-9B leads
Qwen-14B: 18.7 (#255), Qwen3.5-9B: 22.5 (#178)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 112.8 | 139.45 |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1027 | — |
| DTBench | — | 71.2% |
| LMCA | — | 24.5% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55% | — |
| LAMBADA | 71.1% | — |
| PIQA | 79.9% | — |
Math Qwen3.5-9B leads
Qwen-14B: 28.7 (#224), Qwen3.5-9B: 33.5 (#174)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 48.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1068 | — |
| GSM8K | 61.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen-14B: —, Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#77)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 79% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 84.4% | — |
| BoolQ | 86.2% | — |
| MMLU | 66.3% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 27.7 (#270), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1042 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1077 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 52.6 (#284), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#276), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1029 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 27.8 (#294), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1051 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1028 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1022 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen-14B better than Qwen3.5-9B?
Qwen3.5-9B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen-14B or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?
Qwen3.5-9B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.3 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen-14B and Qwen3.5-9B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen-14B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.