# phi-3-medium 14B vs Qwen-14B

> Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/phi-3-medium-14b-vs-qwen-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 4

## Summary

- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. phi-3-medium 14B scores higher in 1 category and Qwen-14B in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where phi-3-medium 14B leads 36.8 to 31.2.

## Snapshot

| | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 306 | 275 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.6% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 48.7% | — |

## Reasoning

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| BIG-Bench Hard | 81.4% | 55% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 121.23 | 113.03 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1027 |
| Adversarial NLI | 55.8% | — |
| HellaSwag | 82.4% | — |
| LAMBADA | — | 71.1% |
| PIQA | — | 79.9% |
| WinoGrande | 81.5% | — |

## Math

- phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
- Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1068 |
| MATH Level 5 | 17.6% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 61.3% |

## Knowledge

- phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
- Qwen-14B: —

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 91.6% | 84.4% |
| MMLU | 78% | 66.3% |
| GPQA Diamond | 27.6% | — |
| BoolQ | — | 86.2% |
| OpenBookQA | 87.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1041 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1077 |

## Instruction Following

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1031 |

## Long Context

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1028 |

## Writing & Preference

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1051 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1028 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1022 |

## FAQ

### Is phi-3-medium 14B better than Qwen-14B?

Qwen-14B is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

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

phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.8 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

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

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. phi-3-medium 14B has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.