# ERNIE 5.1 vs phi-3-medium 14B

> ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/ernie-5-1-vs-phi-3-medium-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in knowledge, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 41.9 to 9.1.
- phi-3-medium 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 29.7 |
| Rank | 83 | 306 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 48.7% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- ERNIE 5.1: —
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |

## Reasoning

- ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 121.23 |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |

## Math

- ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 17.6% |

## Knowledge

- ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 27.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| MMLU | — | 78% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |

## Multilingual

- ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | — |
| LMArena French | 1488 | — |
| LMArena German | 1470 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | — |

## Instruction Following

- ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | — |

## Long Context

- ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | — |

## FAQ

### Is ERNIE 5.1 better than phi-3-medium 14B?

ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is ERNIE 5.1 or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and phi-3-medium 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.