# Qwen-14B vs QwQ-32B

> QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen-14b-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen-14B scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where QwQ-32B leads 50.9 to 27.8.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 39.4 |
| Rank | 273 | 153 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen-14B: 30.6 (#283)
- QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1072 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |

## Reasoning

- Qwen-14B: 18.7 (#255)
- QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1027 | 1326 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 112.8 | 137.6 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 55% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LAMBADA | 71.1% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
| PIQA | 79.9% | — |

## Math

- Qwen-14B: 28.7 (#224)
- QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1068 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| GSM8K | 61.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen-14B: —
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1323 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 84.4% | — |
| BoolQ | 86.2% | — |
| MMLU | 66.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen-14B: 27.7 (#270)
- QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1042 | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1077 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | — | 1337 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1353 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen-14B: 52.6 (#284)
- QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#276)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1029 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen-14B: 27.8 (#294)
- QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

| Benchmark | Qwen-14B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1051 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1028 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1022 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen-14B better than QwQ-32B?

QwQ-32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.4 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen-14B or QwQ-32B better for coding?

QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.9 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen-14B and QwQ-32B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen-14B has 18 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.