Qwen3 14B vs Solar Mini 4
Solar Mini 4 leads Qwen3 14B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.1 to 6.7, at about the same output price ($0.20 vs $0.23 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3 14B or Solar Mini 4: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3 14B for work measured by SciCode or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 4
- Qwen3 14B only
- 16
- Solar Mini 4 only
- 3
- Like-for-like categories
- 4 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Solar Mini 4
Solar Mini 4 leads, 24.1 against 6.7.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Solar Mini 4 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1158.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Solar Mini 4
Solar Mini 4 takes 524K tokens against 41K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Solar Mini 4
Qwen3 14B $0.0002, Solar Mini 4 $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3 14B not benchmarked, Solar Mini 4 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 83.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Qwen3 14B 0.0% against Solar Mini 4 83.3%, 83.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3 14B $0.23 against Solar Mini 4 $0.20 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen3 14B takes 41K tokens, Solar Mini 4 524K.
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.
| Category | Qwen3 14B | Bars | Solar Mini 4 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 4 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 52.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| SciCode | 30.7% | 47.6% | Solar Mini 4 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 5.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 6.7 | 24.1 | Solar Mini 4 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 138.2 | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 34.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 41.0% | Not measured | 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
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 60.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.5% | 25.8% | Solar Mini 4 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 63.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 49.1% | Not measured | 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, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 58.0 | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 58.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 66.4% | Not measured | 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
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.4% | Not measured | 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 index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1158 | Only Solar Mini 4 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1106 | Only Solar Mini 4 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1150 | Only Solar Mini 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 40.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 0.0% | 83.3% | Solar Mini 4 |
| DTBench | 64.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| LMCA | 18.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 14B measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 62.5% | Not measured | 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
| Benchmark | Qwen3 14B | Solar Mini 4 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Solar Mini 4 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Solar Mini 4 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Solar Mini 4 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 | Qwen3 14B | Upstage Solar Mini 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Upstage |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | April 28, 2025 | September 23, 2026 |
| Context window | 41K | 524K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.11 | $0.05 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.23 | $0.20 |
| 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 Qwen3 14B better than Solar Mini 4 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 14B for work measured by SciCode or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 14B or Solar Mini 4?
Qwen3 14B costs $0.11 per million input tokens and $0.23 per million output tokens; Solar Mini 4 costs $0.05 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3 14B or Solar Mini 4?
Solar Mini 4, with 524K tokens against 41K.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3 14B vs Solar Mini 4 comparison based on?
4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3 14B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Solar Mini 4's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.