# Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Qwen3 14B

> Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.5 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/granite-3-1-8b-instruct-vs-qwen3-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 14B in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 14B leads 39.3 to 31.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 27.1% for Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and 41% for Qwen3 14B.

## Snapshot

| | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 35.5 |
| Rank | 258 | 225 |
| Context | — | 131K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.35 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233)
- Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1186 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120)
- Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 27.1% | 41% |

## Reasoning

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207)
- Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1145 | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.23 |

## Math

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1152 | — |

## Knowledge

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220)
- Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 63.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1142 | — |

## Multilingual

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1099 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1145 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1092 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1131 | — |

## Long Context

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1162 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1150 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1129 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1108 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.5 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

Qwen3 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.3 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Qwen3 14B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.