Model comparison

gpt-oss-20b vs Qwen1.5-14B

gpt-oss-20b and Qwen1.5-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.5 vs 32.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

gpt-oss-20b OpenAI

32.5

Rank #255 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.7

Rank #253 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. gpt-oss-20b scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where gpt-oss-20b leads 42.2 to 30.7.

Side by side

gpt-oss-20b and Qwen1.5-14B specifications
gpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.532.7
Released2025-08-052024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K—
Max output16K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.018—
Output $ / M tokens$0.09—
Results tracked3417

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

Category by category

Coding gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 37.6 (#192), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Coding13061138
SciCode34.4%—
WeirdML40.9%—
ALE-Bench566.05—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

gpt-oss-20b: 9.3 (#154), Qwen1.5-14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
Terminal-Bench3.4%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-14B leads

gpt-oss-20b: 19.3 (#261), Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts12741113
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%—
CritPt1.4%—
Chess Puzzles4%—
DTBench68%—
LMCA14.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index137.82—

Math gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 39.4 (#103), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Math13171125
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202565.3%—
Omni-MATH56.5%—

Knowledge gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 34.6 (#195), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Expert12581094
GPQA Diamond60.8%—
MMLU-Pro74%—
GPQA (HELM)59.4%—
MMLU—68.6%

Multilingual gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 42.2 (#197), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Non-English12681095
LMArena Chinese13141147
LMArena German12551043
LMArena Japanese12441019
LMArena Russian12781046
LMArena Spanish12671085
LMArena French—1116
LMArena Korean1236—

Instruction Following gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 61.8 (#240), Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Instruction Following12361102
IFEval73.2%—

Long Context gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 37.9 (#209), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Longer Query12501113

Writing & Preference gpt-oss-20b leads

gpt-oss-20b: 35.5 (#265), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen1.5-14B
LMArena Text12871128
LMArena Creative Writing12011091
LMArena Multi-Turn12681110
EQ-Bench Creative Writing666—
WildBench73.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is gpt-oss-20b better than Qwen1.5-14B?

gpt-oss-20b and Qwen1.5-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.5 vs 32.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is gpt-oss-20b or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

gpt-oss-20b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.6 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do gpt-oss-20b and Qwen1.5-14B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. gpt-oss-20b has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper