Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Codestral 2508 vs Qwen3 14B

Qwen3 14B costs 3.9x less per output token than Codestral 2508 ($0.23 vs $0.90 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.

Codestral 2508Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.90
0
Qwen3 14BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.23
1
vs boards won of 1 shared

Codestral 2508 or Qwen3 14B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Codestral 2508 for a larger context window (256K against 41K tokens) and work measured by Kagi LLM Benchmark, where it leads.

Shared results
1
Codestral 2508 only
7
Qwen3 14B only
19
Like-for-like categories
1 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Codestral 2508 not benchmarked, Qwen3 14B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 16.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Kagi LLM Benchmark: Codestral 2508 32.5% against Qwen3 14B 49.1%, 16.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Codestral 2508 $0.90 against Qwen3 14B $0.23 per million output tokens, 3.9x apart.
Context window
Codestral 2508 takes 256K tokens, Qwen3 14B 41K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryCodestral 2508BarsQwen3 14BTies
Reasoning01
All shared boards01
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured52.3%Only Qwen3 14B measured
SciCodeNot measured30.7%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured5.3%Only Qwen3 14B measured
ALE-Bench137.8Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured6.7Only Qwen3 14B measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured138.2Only Qwen3 14B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured34.5%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured41.0%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured60.4%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.5%Only Qwen3 14B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured63.8%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark32.5%49.1%Qwen3 14B
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured58.0Only Qwen3 14B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured58.0%Only Qwen3 14B measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured66.4%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured77.4%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
Design Arena: websites1013Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: UI components1017Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: game dev968Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: data viz1017Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: 3D1020Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1007Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
IFBenchNot measured40.5%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured0.0%Only Qwen3 14B measured
DTBenchNot measured64.0%Only Qwen3 14B measured
LMCANot measured18.2%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured62.5%Only Qwen3 14B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Qwen3 14BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.0008Fits in one request
Qwen3 14B$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3 14B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.018Fits in one request
Qwen3 14B$0.0062Exceeds the context window

Qwen3 14B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.069Fits in one request
Qwen3 14B$0.024Exceeds the context window

Qwen3 14B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Codestral 2508 and Qwen3 14B
SpecificationMistral Codestral 2508Qwen3 14B
MakerMistral AIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 1, 2025April 28, 2025
Context window256K41K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.11
Output $/Mtok$0.90$0.23
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Codestral 2508 better than Qwen3 14B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Codestral 2508 for a larger context window (256K against 41K tokens) and work measured by Kagi LLM Benchmark, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Codestral 2508 or Qwen3 14B?

Codestral 2508 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B costs $0.11 and $0.23. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Codestral 2508 or Qwen3 14B?

Codestral 2508, with 256K tokens against 41K.

How many benchmarks is the Codestral 2508 vs Qwen3 14B comparison based on?

1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Codestral 2508's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 14B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next