# Llama 3.2 1B vs Qwen-14B

> Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-1b-vs-qwen-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen-14B in 6 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen-14B leads 31.2 to 10.4.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 354 | 275 |
| Context | 60K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.027 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)
- Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1027 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | 113.03 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 55% |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1068 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 84.4% |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| MMLU | — | 66.3% |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)
- Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | 1077 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)
- Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1031 |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)
- Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1028 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)
- Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1022 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Qwen-14B?

Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Llama 3.2 1B or Qwen-14B better for coding?

Qwen-14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.2 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Qwen-14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.