Model comparison
Qwen-14B vs Solar Pro4
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
UpstageSummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen-14B scores higher in 0 categories and Solar Pro4 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Solar Pro4 leads 56.5 to 27.6.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Upstage |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 42.1 |
| Released | 2023-09-24 | 2026-08-06 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 524K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1071 | 1437 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1371 |
Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1027 | 1399 |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 113.03 | — |
| LAMBADA | 71.1% | — |
| PIQA | 79.9% | — |
Math Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1068 | 1416 |
| GSM8K | 61.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen-14B: —, Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1427 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 84.4% | — |
| BoolQ | 86.2% | — |
| MMLU | 66.3% | — |
Multilingual Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1041 | 1361 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1077 | 1415 |
| LMArena French | — | 1397 |
| LMArena German | — | 1364 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1309 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1382 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1360 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1401 |
Instruction Following Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1377 |
Long Context Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1028 | 1381 |
Writing & Preference Solar Pro4 leads
Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Solar Pro4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1051 | 1386 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1028 | 1316 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1022 | 1385 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen-14B better than Solar Pro4?
Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen-14B or Solar Pro4 better for coding?
Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen-14B and Solar Pro4 share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen-14B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.