Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen-14B

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 Anthropic

61.9

Rank #10 Confirmed

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #275 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 87.9 to 31.2.
  • Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index61.931.4
Released2026-09-282023-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$2—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked3218

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 67.3 (#6), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Coding15131071
FrontierCode52.1%—
CursorBench55.5%—
LMArena WebDev1774—
FrontierSWE61.9%—
SciCode61%—
ALE-Bench1,819—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.0 (#16), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
APEX-Agents75.5%—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 54.0 (#28), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts14951027
Epoch Capabilities Index165.03113.03
NYT Connections (extended)80.5%—
CritPt31.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles65%—
BIG-Bench Hard—55%
LAMBADA—71.1%
PIQA—79.9%

Math Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 87.9 (#6), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Math15101068
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)88.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 480.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—
GSM8K—61.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#12), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
GPQA Diamond95.6%—
SimpleQA Verified46.5%—
LMArena Expert1540—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—84.4%
BoolQ—86.2%
MMLU—66.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 51.5 (#6), Qwen-14B: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Vision1289—
Furniture Assembly75%—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 55.3 (#30), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Non-English14521041
LMArena Chinese15221077
LMArena Russian1451—

Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 78.3 (#11), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Instruction Following14951031

Long Context Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.9 (#28), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Longer Query14981028

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#40), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen-14B
LMArena Text14711051
LMArena Creative Writing14651028
LMArena Multi-Turn14741022

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than Qwen-14B?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Qwen-14B better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.3 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Qwen-14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 32 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper