Model comparison
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 vs Qwen3 14B
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 25.9 to 18.5.
- Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.8 | 35.5 |
| Released | — | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.40 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175), Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1314 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —, Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141), Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1299 | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.23 |
Math Qwen3 14B leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174), Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1298 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3 14B leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183), Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 63.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1289 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1265 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1314 | — |
| LMArena German | 1231 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1271 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1275 | — |
Long Context Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184), Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1292 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192), Qwen3 14B: —
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1299 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1262 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1299 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better than Qwen3 14B?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 or Qwen3 14B better for coding?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3 14B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.