ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3 14B vs Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) comes out ahead, 68 to 54 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 14B is 2.6× cheaper per token.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 14B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    54/100
    • ECI138.2
    • Price$0.35 / $1.40
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 14B
  2. Our pick

    xAI

    Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)

    Released Mar 9, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI152.0
    • Price$1.25 / $2.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is our pick

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 14B (54). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 14B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Capabilities Index (ECI): Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 152.0 · Qwen3 14B 138.2
  • Lowest priceQwen3 14BQwen3 14B $0.613 · Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) $1.56 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 1,000,000 · Qwen3 14B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)Qwen3 14B: Text · Grok 4.20 (Reasoning): Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingQwen3 14BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 14BGrok 4.20 (Reasoning)
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6381
Price25%6041
Inputs & features15%3580
Context window10%2460
Overall100%54/10068/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3 14B vs Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 14BAlibaba (Qwen)Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)xAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)138.2152.0 (best)
ECI rank#107 of 148#41 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions63.8%89.3% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—44.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.4%92.2% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—30.2%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.35 (best)$1.25
Output$1.40 (best)$2.50
Cached input—$0.20
Blended (3:1)$0.613 (best)$1.56
Long-context rateSame rateOver 200K: $2.50 / $5.00
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial xAI API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens30,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDqwen3-14bgrok-4.20-0309-reasoning
API providers111 (best)
ReleasedApr 29, 2025Mar 9, 2026
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3 14B$6.30
  • Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)$17.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 14B or Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 14B (54). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 14B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 14B or Grok 4.20 (Reasoning)?

Qwen3 14B is cheaper at $0.35 input / $1.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) costs $1.25 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official xAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.613 per million tokens for Qwen3 14B versus $1.56 for Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) (2.6× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 152.0 (#41 of 148) and Qwen3 14B 138.2 (#107 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (149.3–154.4 vs 133.5–140.1), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 89.3%, Qwen3 14B 63.8%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) 92.2%, Qwen3 14B 66.4%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 14B and Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 14B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 14B up to 8,192, Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) up to 30,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 14B accepts text; Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) accepts text, images and PDFs. Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 14B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Grok 4.20 (Reasoning) is the newest, released Mar 9, 2026. Qwen3 14B came out Apr 29, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 14B Apr 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons