ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 vs Qwen3 14B

Qwen3 14B comes out ahead, 54 to 44 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2

    Released Oct 22, 2024

    44/100
    • ECI133.5
    • Price$3.00 / $15.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 14B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

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

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3 14B is our pick

Qwen3 14B is the better all-round choice, scoring 54/100 against Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (44). It leads on capability and price. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3 14BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 14B 138.2 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5
  • Lowest priceQwen3 14BQwen3 14B $0.613 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 200,000 · Qwen3 14B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3 14B: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3 14BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2Qwen3 14B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5763
Price25%1360
Inputs & features15%6035
Context window10%3224
Overall100%44/10054/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 vs Qwen3 14B specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2AnthropicQwen3 14BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)133.5138.2 (best)
ECI rank#119 of 148#107 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions55.3%63.8% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics8.5%66.4% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$3.00$0.35 (best)
Output$15.00$1.40 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$6.00$0.613 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model ID—qwen3-14b
API providers11
ReleasedOct 22, 2024Apr 29, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 30, 2024Apr 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.

  • Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2$60.00
  • Qwen3 14B$6.30
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 or Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is the better all-round choice, scoring 54/100 against Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (44). It leads on capability and price. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 or Qwen3 14B?

Qwen3 14B is cheaper at $0.35 input / $1.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 costs $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.613 per million tokens for Qwen3 14B versus $6.00 for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (9.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3 14B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 14B 138.2 (#107 of 148) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5 (#119 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (133.5–140.1 vs 129.2–137.5), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3 14B 63.8%, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 55.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 14B 66.4%, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 8.5%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 and Qwen3 14B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3 14B 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?

Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 14B. Maximum output per response: Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 up to 8,192, Qwen3 14B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3 14B accepts text. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 14B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 14B is the newest, released Apr 29, 2025. Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 came out Oct 22, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 Apr 30, 2024, 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