Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

gpt-oss-20b vs Qwen3 14B

gpt-oss-20b leads Qwen3 14B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.0 to 6.7, and gpt-oss-20b costs 1.5x less per output token ($0.15 vs $0.23 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 18 benchmarks have a result for both.

gpt-oss-20bOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
38.5
Output $/M
$0.15
13
Qwen3 14BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.23
5
vs boards won of 18 shared

gpt-oss-20b or Qwen3 14B: which to pick

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

Pick gpt-oss-20b for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.23 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 41K tokens).

Shared results
18
gpt-oss-20b only
44
Qwen3 14B only
2
Like-for-like categories
7 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
gpt-oss-20b not benchmarked, Qwen3 14B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 25.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): gpt-oss-20b 34.7% against Qwen3 14B 0.0%, 34.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
gpt-oss-20b $0.15 against Qwen3 14B $0.23 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
gpt-oss-20b takes 131K 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
Categorygpt-oss-20bBarsQwen3 14BTies
Coding30
Intelligence11
Agentic work10
Reasoning31
Math21
Knowledge01
General31
All shared boards135
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)80.4%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)77.7%52.3%gpt-oss-20b
SciCode38.9%30.7%gpt-oss-20b
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)10.6%5.3%gpt-oss-20b
Terminal-Bench3.4%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
WeirdML40.9%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
ALE-Bench566.0Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: coding1307Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1311Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Intelligence benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.06.7gpt-oss-20b
Epoch Capabilities Index137.7138.2Qwen3 14B
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom60.2%34.5%gpt-oss-20b
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured41.0%Only Qwen3 14B measured
BrowseComp-Plus50.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
Reasoning benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
GPQA Diamond68.9%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)68.8%60.4%gpt-oss-20b
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)11.0%4.5%gpt-oss-20b
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)60.8%63.8%Qwen3 14B
LMArena Text: hard prompts1274Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: expert1258Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1292Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%49.1%gpt-oss-20b
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
Math benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
AIME86.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.2%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.0%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
AA Math Index89.358.0gpt-oss-20b
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)89.3%58.0%gpt-oss-20b
OTIS Mock AIME65.3%66.4%Qwen3 14B
LMArena Text: math1317Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1305Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
MMLU Pro71.6%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)70.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)43.8%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)53.1%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)63.7%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
MedQA (Vals AI)82.9%Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)74.8%77.4%Qwen3 14B
LMArena Text: science1296Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1310Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1280Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1284Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
Design Arena: websites852Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Design Arena: data viz933Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
General benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 14BLeader
IFBench65.1%40.5%gpt-oss-20b
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)34.7%0.0%gpt-oss-20b
DTBench68.0%64.0%gpt-oss-20b
LMCA14.5%18.2%Qwen3 14B
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured62.5%Only Qwen3 14B measured
LMArena Text1288Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1236Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1201Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: English1303Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: non-English1269Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1315Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: German1255Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1244Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: Korean1236Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1267Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: Russian1278Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: Polish1252Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1268Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1250Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1238Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1216Not measuredOnly gpt-oss-20b measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
Benchmarkgpt-oss-20bQwen3 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

gpt-oss-20b$0.0001Fits in one request
Qwen3 14B$0.0002Fits in one request

gpt-oss-20b costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

gpt-oss-20b$0.0019Fits in one request
Qwen3 14B$0.0062Exceeds the context window

gpt-oss-20b costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

gpt-oss-20b$0.0075Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 14B$0.024Exceeds the context window

gpt-oss-20b 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 gpt-oss-20b and Qwen3 14B
SpecificationOpenAI gpt-oss-20bQwen3 14B
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 5, 2025April 28, 2025
Context window131K41K
Input $/Mtok$0.03$0.11
Output $/Mtok$0.15$0.23
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is gpt-oss-20b better than Qwen3 14B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick gpt-oss-20b for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.23 per million) and a larger context window (131K against 41K tokens).

Which is cheaper, gpt-oss-20b or Qwen3 14B?

gpt-oss-20b costs $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.15 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-oss-20b or Qwen3 14B?

gpt-oss-20b, with 131K tokens against 41K.

How many benchmarks is the gpt-oss-20b vs Qwen3 14B comparison based on?

18 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. gpt-oss-20b'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