# ERNIE 5.1 vs Qwen-14B

> ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/ernie-5-1-vs-qwen-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 10

## Summary

- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 65.1 to 27.6.
- Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 83 | 275 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1071 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- ERNIE 5.1: —
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | — |

## Reasoning

- ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211)
- Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1027 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 113.03 |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |

## Math

- ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1068 |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |

## Knowledge

- ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102)
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |

## Multilingual

- ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29)
- Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | 1077 |
| 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)
- Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 1031 |

## Long Context

- ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59)
- Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 1028 |

## Writing & Preference

- ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52)
- Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1022 |

## FAQ

### Is ERNIE 5.1 better than Qwen-14B?

ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is ERNIE 5.1 or Qwen-14B better for coding?

ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and Qwen-14B share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.