Model comparison
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#314); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5 14B Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 52.2% for Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and 46.1% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen2.5 14B Instruct.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.2 | 28.6 |
| Released | 2024-09 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 131K |
| Max output | 8K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.35 | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 3 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 14B Instruct leads
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: 37.1 (#187), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 39.8% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.2% | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Not comparable
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.44 |
Math Not comparable
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 79.9% | 72.9% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 14B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5 14B Instruct better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#314); Qwen2.5 14B Instruct does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 14B Instruct or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 14B Instruct lists at $0.35 and $1.40.
Is Qwen2.5 14B Instruct or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 14B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.1 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 131K tokens.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 14B Instruct and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 14B Instruct has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.