GPT-5 Image Mini vs Qwen3 14B
Qwen3 14B costs 8.7x less per output token than GPT-5 Image Mini ($0.23 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $2.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.23
GPT-5 Image Mini or Qwen3 14B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick GPT-5 Image Mini for a larger context window (400K against 41K tokens).
No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5 Image Mini has results on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos; Qwen3 14B on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), SciCode and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run). Compare them on price and context instead.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Qwen3 14B has a AA Intelligence Index result, 6.7.
Directional only
Image generation
Design Arena: images
No call
Only GPT-5 Image Mini has a Design Arena: images result, 1184.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5 Image Mini
GPT-5 Image Mini takes 400K tokens against 41K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 14B
GPT-5 Image Mini $0.0035, Qwen3 14B $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5 Image Mini not benchmarked, Qwen3 14B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- GPT-5 Image Mini $2.00 against Qwen3 14B $0.23 per million output tokens, 8.7x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5 Image Mini takes 400K tokens, Qwen3 14B 41K.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 52.3% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 30.7% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 5.3% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 6.7 | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 138.2 | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 34.5% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | Not measured | 41.0% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 60.4% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 4.5% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 63.8% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Not measured | 49.1% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 58.0 | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 58.0% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 66.4% | 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 measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 77.4% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 40.5% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 64.0% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 18.2% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 62.5% | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here | |||
Image generationDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: images | 1184 | Not measured | Only GPT-5 Image Mini measured |
| Design Arena: graphic design | 1165 | Not measured | Only GPT-5 Image Mini measured |
| Design Arena: logos | 1209 | Not measured | Only GPT-5 Image Mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 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
Qwen3 14B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 14B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-5 Image Mini | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | October 16, 2025 | April 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 400K | 41K |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.50 | $0.11 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.00 | $0.23 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5 Image Mini better than Qwen3 14B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-5 Image Mini for a larger context window (400K against 41K tokens).
Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Image Mini or Qwen3 14B?
GPT-5 Image Mini costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $2.00 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, GPT-5 Image Mini or Qwen3 14B?
GPT-5 Image Mini, with 400K tokens against 41K.
Has any benchmark tested both GPT-5 Image Mini and Qwen3 14B?
No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5 Image Mini has results on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos; Qwen3 14B on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), SciCode and Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.