# Mistral Small 3.2 vs Qwen3 14B

> Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.5 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 4.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 14B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mistral-small-3-2-vs-qwen3-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 5

## Summary

- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Small 3.2 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3 14B in 3 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 14B leads 39.3 to 26.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 30.3% for Mistral Small 3.2 and 66.4% for Qwen3 14B.
- Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.0938 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
- Mistral Small 3.2 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.2 | 35.5 |
| Rank | 280 | 225 |
| Context | 256K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.0938 | $0.35 |
| Output $/M | $0.25 | $1.40 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Mistral Small 3.2: —
- Qwen3 14B: 37.3 (#195)

| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Mistral Small 3.2: —
- Qwen3 14B: 29.6 (#83)

| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |

## Reasoning

- Mistral Small 3.2: 18.1 (#287)
- Qwen3 14B: 18.5 (#280)

| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | 49.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 1% | 4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 131.74 | 138.23 |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |

## Math

- Mistral Small 3.2: 26.3 (#260)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.6 (#133)

| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 30.3% | 66.4% |

## Knowledge

- Mistral Small 3.2: 26.7 (#256)
- Qwen3 14B: 39.3 (#134)

| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 49.1% | 63.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |

## Long Context

- Mistral Small 3.2: —
- Qwen3 14B: 38.1 (#204)

| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |

## Writing & Preference

- Mistral Small 3.2: 45.0 (#224)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1255 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Mistral Small 3.2 better than Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.5 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 4.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 14B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Mistral Small 3.2 or Qwen3 14B?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0938 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Small 3.2 does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Mistral Small 3.2 and Qwen3 14B share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small 3.2 has 6 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.