# phi-3-medium 14B vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

> Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/phi-3-medium-14b-vs-qwen2-5-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 35.5 to 9.1.
- phi-3-medium 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 38.8 |
| Rank | 306 | 181 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.6% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1314 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 48.7% | — |

## Reasoning

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1299 |
| Adversarial NLI | 55.8% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 81.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 121.23 | — |
| HellaSwag | 82.4% | — |
| WinoGrande | 81.5% | — |

## Math

- phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1298 |
| MATH Level 5 | 17.6% | — |

## Knowledge

- phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1289 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 91.6% | — |
| MMLU | 78% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 87.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1314 |
| LMArena German | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1271 |

## Instruction Following

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1275 |

## Long Context

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1292 |

## Writing & Preference

- phi-3-medium 14B: —
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)

| Benchmark | phi-3-medium 14B | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1299 |

## FAQ

### Is phi-3-medium 14B better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Is phi-3-medium 14B or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do phi-3-medium 14B and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. phi-3-medium 14B has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.