Model comparison
Qwen-14B vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen-14B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 62.4 to 27.8.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 47.3 |
| Released | 2023-09-24 | 2026-03-31 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen-14B: 30.6 (#283), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.6 (#125)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1072 | 1467 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1461 |
| SciCode | — | 40.7% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 670.15 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen-14B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen-14B: 18.7 (#255), Qwen3.6 Plus: 28.5 (#89)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1027 | 1449 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 112.8 | 147.67 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| CritPt | — | 2.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 17% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 12% |
| DTBench | — | 81.9% |
| LMCA | — | 33.1% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55% | — |
| LAMBADA | 71.1% | — |
| PIQA | 79.9% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen-14B: 28.7 (#224), Qwen3.6 Plus: 50.6 (#44)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1068 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 38.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |
| GSM8K | 61.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen-14B: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#40)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 88.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1456 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 84.4% | — |
| BoolQ | 86.2% | — |
| MMLU | 66.3% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen-14B: 27.7 (#270), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1042 | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1077 | 1478 |
| LMArena French | — | 1454 |
| LMArena German | — | 1451 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1381 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1432 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen-14B: 52.6 (#284), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.2 (#70)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1425 |
Long Context Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#276), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.1 (#48)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1029 | 1440 |
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Qwen-14B: 27.8 (#294), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.4 (#78)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1051 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1028 | 1405 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1022 | 1438 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen-14B better than Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen-14B or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.6 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen-14B and Qwen3.6 Plus share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen-14B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.