Home › Comparison tool › Qwen 3 14B vs Phi-4 14B

Qwen 3 14BvsPhi-4 14B

Complete comparison between Qwen 3 14B (14B parameters, Alibaba) and Phi-4 14B (14B, Microsoft). VRAM required for each quantization, tokens per second measured on 4 reference GPUs, use-case verdict, license, and installation commands. All figures are calculated from catalog data—no copy-pasting between pages.

In brief

Feature Qwen 3 14B Phi-4 14B
Settings 14B 14B
Family Qwen Phi
Author Alibaba Microsoft
Origin CN US
License Apache 2.0 MIT
Context 131,072 tokens 16,384 tokens
Output April 2025 December 2024

Memory footprint

Approximate VRAM required for inference with an average context window. The winner (in green) is the model that uses less — smaller models have the edge.

Quantization Qwen 3 14B Phi-4 14B
Q4_K_M (lightweight) 9 GB 9 GB
Q5_K_M (balanced) 11 GB 11 GB
Q8 (near-lossless) 16 GB 16 GB
FP16 (max quality) 28 GB 28 GB
CPU-only RAM 16 GB 16 GB

Estimated speed (tokens/second)

Estimates based on the best quantization that can fit on each GPU. Actual figures depend on the prompt, context, and engine (llama.cpp, vLLM, MLX). Methodology.

Reference GPU Qwen 3 14B Phi-4 14B
RTX 4090 (24 GB) 55 tok/s · Q8 55 tok/s · Q8
RTX 4080 (16 GB) 20 tok/s · Q8 20 tok/s · Q8
RTX 3060 12GB (12 GB) 6 tok/s · Q5_K_M 6 tok/s · Q5_K_M
Apple M4 Pro (48 GB) (36 GB) 20 tok/s · FP16 20 tok/s · FP16

Verdict by use case

For each common use case, we indicate which of the two is better suited based on its tags, size, and specialization.

General chat
Close match — it depends on the exact use case. The two are equivalent on this criterion; decide based on your VRAM or licensing constraints.
Reasoning / math
Close match — it depends on the exact use case. The two are equivalent on this criterion; decide based on your VRAM or licensing constraints.
RAG / long documents
Qwen 3 14B wins. Larger context window (131,072 tokens), suitable for long documents.
Agents & tool use
Close match — it depends on the exact use case. The two are equivalent on this criterion; decide based on your VRAM or licensing constraints.
The Local AI Kit

Your private, free ChatGPT on your machine in 1 hour — LM Studio, Ollama, Open WebUI, your documents, no cloud.

  • Lifetime online access
  • PDF + files
  • 30-day money-back guarantee

Strengths and weaknesses

Alibaba · 14B

Qwen 3 14B

Dense 14B with hybrid thinking. Equals Qwen 2.5 32B Based on STEM/code.

  • Dense 14B matching Qwen 2.5 32B Base
  • Hybrid thinking
  • 131k ctx
  • Not yet at the level of specialized reasoners on AIME

Installation

ollama run qwen3:14b
Microsoft · 14B

Phi-4 14B

Exceptional reasoning for its size. STEM-focused.

  • Best 14B for reasoning in late 2024
  • MIT License
  • Very strong in math/science
  • Good at coding
  • 16k context only — major limitation
  • Less multilingual than Qwen

Installation

ollama run phi4:14b

Frequently asked questions

Which model runs best on RTX 4090 (24 GB): Qwen 3 14B or Phi-4 14B?

On an RTX 4090, Qwen 3 14B runs at Q8 (~55 tok/s), Phi-4 14B in Q8 (~55 tok/s). In raw throughput, Phi-4 14B wins. See the configurator to test your exact GPU.

Which uses the least VRAM?

Both require the same VRAM in Q4 (9 GB). The choice then comes down to the license or perceived quality.

Can these models be used in commercial production?

Qwen 3 14B is under Apache 2.0 — free for commercial use. Phi-4 14B is also free under the MIT license. For SaaS, favor Apache 2.0 or MIT.

Which one should you choose in 2026?

Depends on your primary constraint. Smaller / faster: Qwen 3 14B (14B). More capable: Qwen 3 14B (14B). If you're unsure, run it configurator with your GPU and use case — it will decide based on both.

Alternatives to consider

If neither works for you, here are some neighboring models you could explore.

Go further