Model Comparison
GPT-3.5 Turbo
vs. Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · OpenAI, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) 10 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
42.2 reasoning / $0.38/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
$0.23/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
42.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
12.4 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) is 2.1x cheaper on input tokens than GPT-3.5 Turbo.
Speed gap
GPT-3.5 Turbo generates about 2.3x as many tokens per second as Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) leads GPT-3.5 Turbo by 14.6 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) leads GPT-3.5 Turbo by 1.7 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GPT-3.5 Turbo
OpenAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Op GPT-3.5 Turbo | Top Pick Al Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.50/1M | $0.23/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.50/1M | $0.82/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.75/1M | $0.38/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | OpenAI | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Nov 30, 2022 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 140.1 tok/s | 61.5 tok/s |
| TTFT | 989ms | 1044ms |
| Latency | 989ms | 1044ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 33.3 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 27.6 | 42.2 |
| Intelligence | 9.0 | 12.8 |
| Coding | 10.7 | 12.4 |
| Math | — | 58.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 29.7% | 47.0% |
| MMLU Pro | 46.2% | 67.5% |
| HLE | — | 4.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 28.0% |
| MATH 500 | 44.1% | 87.1% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 58.0% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 28.0% |
| SciCode | — | 26.5% |
| LCR | — | 0.0% |
| IFBench | — | 23.9% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 32.2% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 5.3% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.23/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 42.2 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 12.4 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
GPT-3.5 Turbo
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
