# phi-3-medium 14B vs Qwen1.5-32B

> phi-3-medium 14B and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.1 vs 30.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/phi-3-medium-14b-vs-qwen1-5-32b
- 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 Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 30.5 to 25.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 48.7% for phi-3-medium 14B and 42% for Qwen1.5-32B.

## Snapshot

| | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 30.0 |
| Rank | 306 | 288 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- phi-3-medium 14B: 36.3 (#198)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.6% | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 48.7% | 42% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1155 |

## Reasoning

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1131 |
| Adversarial NLI | 55.8% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 81.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 121.18 | — |
| HellaSwag | 82.4% | — |
| WinoGrande | 81.5% | — |

## Math

- phi-3-medium 14B: 25.2 (#249)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |
| MATH Level 5 | 17.6% | — |

## Knowledge

- phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#301)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.6% | 30.7% |
| MMLU | 78% | 74.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 91.6% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 87.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1176 |
| LMArena French | — | 1100 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1007 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |

## Instruction Following

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1116 |

## Long Context

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1146 |

## Writing & Preference

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1140 |

## FAQ

### Is phi-3-medium 14B better than Qwen1.5-32B?

phi-3-medium 14B and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (29.1 vs 30.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Is phi-3-medium 14B or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

phi-3-medium 14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.3 versus 31.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do phi-3-medium 14B and Qwen1.5-32B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. phi-3-medium 14B has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.