# Qwen3 14B vs Step 3.5 Flash

> Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen3-14b-vs-step-3-5-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in coding, where Step 3.5 Flash leads 41.7 to 36.7.
- Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
- Step 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 35.0 | 41.7 |
| Rank | 222 | 116 |
| Context | 131K | 256K |
| Input $/M | $0.35 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $1.40 | $0.30 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen3 14B: 36.7 (#191)
- Step 3.5 Flash: 41.7 (#106)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 31.6% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1436 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Qwen3 14B: 29.4 (#78)
- Step 3.5 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 41% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen3 14B: 18.1 (#272)
- Step 3.5 Flash: 21.2 (#202)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 49.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 28.4% |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1411 |
| DTBench | 64% | — |
| LMCA | 18.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 138.23 | — |

## Math

- Qwen3 14B: 37.0 (#102)
- Step 3.5 Flash: 40.6 (#77)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 66.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 66.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1408 |

## Knowledge

- Qwen3 14B: 39.2 (#124)
- Step 3.5 Flash: 39.0 (#127)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 63.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1422 |

## Multilingual

- Qwen3 14B: —
- Step 3.5 Flash: 50.7 (#115)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1386 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1448 |
| LMArena French | — | 1421 |
| LMArena German | — | 1404 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1353 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1385 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1419 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen3 14B: —
- Step 3.5 Flash: 73.3 (#119)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1385 |

## Long Context

- Qwen3 14B: 38.0 (#201)
- Step 3.5 Flash: 42.8 (#112)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 62.5% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1402 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen3 14B: —
- Step 3.5 Flash: 59.0 (#108)

| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1403 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1357 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1405 |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen3 14B better than Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen3 14B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.

### Is Qwen3 14B or Step 3.5 Flash better for coding?

Step 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.7 versus 36.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.5 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen3 14B and Step 3.5 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3 14B has 12 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.5 Flash has 19.