Model comparison

Qwen3 14B vs Solar Pro4

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3 14B Alibaba (Qwen)

35.5

Rank #225 Confirmed

Solar Pro4 Upstage

42.1

Rank #121 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Solar Pro4 leads 28.5 to 18.5.
  • Solar Pro4 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
  • Solar Pro4 accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3 14B and Solar Pro4 specifications
Qwen3 14BSolar Pro4
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Upstage
Noometry Index35.542.1
Released2025-042026-08-06
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window131K524K
Max output8K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.35$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$1.40$1.20
Results tracked1218

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

Category by category

Coding Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
LMArena WebDev—1371
SciCode31.6%—
LMArena Coding—1437

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83), Solar Pro4: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard41%—

Reasoning Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
Kagi LLM Benchmark49.1%—
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1399
DTBench64%—
LMCA18.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index138.23—

Math Too close to call

Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202566.4%—
LMArena Math—1416

Knowledge Too close to call

Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
GPQA Diamond63.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.4%—
LMArena Expert—1427

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: —, Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
LMArena Non-English—1361
LMArena Chinese—1415
LMArena French—1397
LMArena German—1364
LMArena Japanese—1309
LMArena Korean—1382
LMArena Russian—1360
LMArena Spanish—1401

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: —, Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following—1377

Long Context Solar Pro4 leads

Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
Fiction.LiveBench62.5%—
LMArena Longer Query—1381

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: —, Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BSolar Pro4
LMArena Text—1386
LMArena Creative Writing—1316
LMArena Multi-Turn—1385

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3 14B better than Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 14B or Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.

Is Qwen3 14B or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

Solar Pro4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Solar Pro4 does, with 524K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3 14B and Solar Pro4 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3 14B has 12 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper