Compare / Qwen3-14B vs Command A

Qwen3-14B vs Command A

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 20 results on 4 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3-14B Released 28 Apr 2025 · $0.12 in · $0.24 out
CohereCommand A Released 13 Mar 2025 · $2.50 in · $10.00 out
Qwen3-14B wins 16Command A wins 4

Of the 20 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.

Results as of 13 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-13-2e2420e3c5cc).

Qwen3-14B or Command A? The short answer

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3-14B: it costs 29 times less per token.

  • Qwen3-14B is cheaper: $0.15 against $4.38 per million tokens, 29 times less.
  • Qwen3-14B scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 8.2 against 7.0.
  • Qwen3-14B is newer: released 28 Apr 2025, against 13 Mar 2025 for Command A.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3-14B does better for reasoning and knowledge and sticking to the facts; Command A for agents and tool use and writing.

Head to head

8.2
Intelligence Index
7.0
$0.15
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$4.38
131,072
Context window, tokens
256,000

Every fact side by side

Qwen3-14BCommand A
Price per million tokens$0.12 in · $0.24 out$2.50 in · $10.00 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.15$4.38
Cheapest host, blended$0.13 (NextBit, INT4)–
Intelligence Index8.27.0
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second–60
Context window131,072 tokens256,000 tokens
Released28 Apr 2025 (newer)13 Mar 2025
WeightsOpenOpen
Developer based inChinaCanada

Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.

Which is better for what

Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 122 of 164 67 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 162 of 198 173 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 130 of 188 126 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 15 of 152 113 of 152

Every shared result

Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.

MeasureQwen3-14BCommand A
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 194 · 216 of 243 measured 8.2thinking reasoning 7.0
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 181 · 195 of 231 measured 60.4%thinking reasoning 52.7%
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 202 · 218 of 242 measured 4.5%thinking reasoning 4.0%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 reported by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 · 3 results
Overall accuracy · BFCL% correct, higher is better 34 · 27 of 81 measured 41.0%bfcl fc 46.5%bfcl fc
Irrelevance detection · BFCL% correct, higher is better 20 · 32 of 81 measured 87.2%bfcl prompt 84.2%bfcl fc
Memory · BFCL% correct, higher is better 33 · 39 of 81 measured 19.6%bfcl fc 16.6%bfcl fc
UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results
Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 128 · 109 of 230 measured 34.8no reasoning 40.6
Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 111 · 124 of 230 measured 20.0%no reasoning 21.0%
Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 49 · 113 of 230 measured 0.37no reasoning 0.35
Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results
Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 17 · 47 of 104 measured 5.4% 9.3%
Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 17 · 80 of 104 measured 99.9% 97.6%
Show all 20 results (9 more)
MeasureQwen3-14BCommand A
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results
IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 132 · 153 of 195 measured 40.5%thinking reasoning 36.5%
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 222 · 197 of 233 measured 0.0%no reasoning 21.3%
Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 153 · 180 of 190 measured 5.3%no reasoning 0.8%
τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 123 · 178 of 193 measured 34.5%thinking reasoning 15.2%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 reported by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4 · 5 results
Multi-turn tasks · BFCL% correct, higher is better 31 · 35 of 81 measured 34.8%bfcl fc 29.5%bfcl fc
Relevance detection · BFCL% correct, higher is better 26 · 36 of 81 measured 87.5%bfcl fc 81.3%bfcl fc
Single-turn calls (curated) · BFCL% correct, higher is better 7 · 22 of 81 measured 89.5%bfcl prompt 87.6%bfcl fc
Single-turn calls (user-contributed) · BFCL% correct, higher is better 10 · 19 of 81 measured 80.0%bfcl fc 78.5%bfcl fc
Web search · BFCL% correct, higher is better 37 · 21 of 81 measured 10.5%bfcl prompt 46.5%bfcl fc

Quick answers

Is Qwen3-14B better than Command A?

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3-14B: it costs 29 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3-14B or Command A?

Qwen3-14B is cheaper: $0.15 against $4.38 per million tokens, 29 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3-14B or Command A?

Command A ranks 67 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 122 for Qwen3-14B.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-14B or Command A?

Qwen3-14B ranks 162 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 173 for Command A.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3-14B or Command A?

Command A ranks 126 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 130 for Qwen3-14B.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-14B or Command A?

Qwen3-14B ranks 15 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 113 for Command A.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-14B or Command A?

Command A: 256,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-14B.

Run Qwen3-14B and Command A on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.