Model comparison

Qwen-14B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #275 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen-14B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 64.3 to 27.6.
  • Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen-14B and Qwen3.7 Plus specifications
Qwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.445.3
Released2023-09-242026-06-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$1.60
Results tracked1832

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding10711473
FrontierCode—10.2%
SciCode—45.5%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen-14B: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts10271460
Epoch Capabilities Index113.03147.37
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LMCA—37.6%
BIG-Bench Hard55%—
LAMBADA71.1%—
PIQA79.9%—

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math10681466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
GSM8K61.3%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Qwen-14B: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
GPQA Diamond—87.9%
LMArena Expert—1467
ARC (AI2) Challenge84.4%—
BoolQ86.2%—
MMLU66.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen-14B: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English10411445
LMArena Chinese10771510
LMArena French—1473
LMArena German—1471
LMArena Japanese—1413
LMArena Korean—1415
LMArena Russian—1457
LMArena Spanish—1457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following10311440

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query10281455

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen-14BQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text10511455
LMArena Creative Writing10281439
LMArena Multi-Turn10221460

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen-14B better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen-14B or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.6 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen-14B and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen-14B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper