Model comparison
Qwen-14B vs Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
StepFunSummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 42.9 to 31.2.
Side by side
| Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2023-09-24 | 2026-05-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 256K |
| Max output | — | 256K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.11 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 5 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Step 3.7 Flash leads
Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 40% |
| LMArena Coding | 1071 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 694.12 |
Reasoning Step 3.7 Flash leads
Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39.7% |
| CritPt | — | 2.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1027 | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 113.03 | — |
| LAMBADA | 71.1% | — |
| PIQA | 79.9% | — |
Math Step 3.7 Flash leads
Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 68.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1068 | — |
| GSM8K | 61.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen-14B: —, Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 84.4% | — |
| BoolQ | 86.2% | — |
| MMLU | 66.3% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1041 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1077 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1028 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1051 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1028 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1022 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen-14B better than Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen-14B or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?
Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen-14B and Step 3.7 Flash share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen-14B has 18 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.