Model comparison

Qwen3 14B vs Step 3

Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.5 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3 14B Alibaba (Qwen)

35.5

Rank #225 Confirmed

Step 3 StepFun

40.5

Rank #149 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Qwen3 14B scores higher in 2 categories and Step 3 in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Step 3 leads 28.4 to 18.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 49.1% for Qwen3 14B and 62.3% for Step 3.

Side by side

Qwen3 14B and Step 3 specifications
Qwen3 14BStep 3
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)StepFun
Noometry Index35.540.5
Released2025-04—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.35—
Output $ / M tokens$1.40—
Results tracked1217

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

Category by category

Coding Step 3 leads

Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195), Step 3: 40.1 (#147)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
SciCode31.6%—
LMArena Coding—1367

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83), Step 3: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard41%—

Reasoning Step 3 leads

Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280), Step 3: 28.4 (#105)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
Kagi LLM Benchmark49.1%62.3%
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1355
DTBench64%—
LMCA18.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index138.23—

Math Too close to call

Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133), Step 3: 37.6 (#148)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202566.4%—
LMArena Math—1366

Knowledge Qwen3 14B leads

Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134), Step 3: 36.8 (#164)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
GPQA Diamond63.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.4%—
LMArena Expert—1333

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: —, Step 3: 35.5 (#86)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
LMArena Vision—1177

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: —, Step 3: 46.3 (#159)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
LMArena Non-English—1327
LMArena Chinese—1397
LMArena German—1371
LMArena Korean—1269
LMArena Russian—1331
LMArena Spanish—1371

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: —, Step 3: 70.4 (#164)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
LMArena Instruction Following—1332

Long Context Step 3 leads

Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204), Step 3: 40.3 (#157)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
Fiction.LiveBench62.5%—
LMArena Longer Query—1326

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3 14B: —, Step 3: 54.3 (#151)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 14BStep 3
LMArena Text—1350
LMArena Creative Writing—1321
LMArena Multi-Turn—1341

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3 14B better than Step 3?

Step 3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.5 to 35.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen3 14B or Step 3 better for coding?

Step 3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3 14B and Step 3 share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Qwen3 14B has 12 scored results on Noometry and Step 3 has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper