Qwen3 Embedding 4B vs Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

Detailed comparison between Qwen3 Embedding 4B and Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B. See which embedding best meets your accuracy and performance needs. If you want to compare these models on your data, try Agentset.

Model Comparison

Qwen3 Embedding 4B takes the lead.

Both Qwen3 Embedding 4B and Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B are powerful embedding models designed to improve retrieval quality in RAG applications. However, their performance characteristics differ in important ways.

Why Qwen3 Embedding 4B:

  • Qwen3 Embedding 4B has 62 higher ELO rating
  • Qwen3 Embedding 4B delivers better accuracy (nDCG@10: 0.705 vs 0.656)
  • Qwen3 Embedding 4B has a 8.9% higher win rate

Overview

Key metrics

ELO Rating

Overall ranking quality

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

1482

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

1420

Win Rate

Head-to-head performance

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

44.6%

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

35.7%

Accuracy (nDCG@10)

Ranking quality metric

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

0.705

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

0.656

Average Latency

Response time

Qwen3 Embedding 4B

29ms

Qwen3 Embedding 0.6B

25ms

Embedding Models Are Just One Piece of RAG

Agentset gives you a managed RAG pipeline with the top-ranked models and best practices baked in. No infrastructure to maintain, no embeddings to manage.

Trusted by teams building production RAG applications

5M+
Documents
1,500+
Teams
99.9%
Uptime

Visual Performance Analysis

Performance

ELO Rating Comparison

Win/Loss/Tie Breakdown

Accuracy Across Datasets (nDCG@10)

Latency Distribution (ms)

Breakdown

How the models stack up

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BQwen3 Embedding 0.6BDescription
Overall Performance
ELO Rating
1482
1420
Overall ranking quality based on pairwise comparisons
Win Rate
44.6%
35.7%
Percentage of comparisons won against other models
Pricing & Availability
Price per 1M tokens
$0.020
$0.010
Cost per million tokens processed
Dimensions
2560
1024
Vector embedding dimensions (lower is more efficient)
Release Date
2025-06-06
2025-06-06
Model release date
Accuracy Metrics
Avg nDCG@10
0.705
0.656
Normalized discounted cumulative gain at position 10
Performance Metrics
Avg Latency
29ms
25ms
Average response time across all datasets

Build RAG in Minutes, Not Months

Agentset gives you a complete RAG API with top-ranked embedding models and smart retrieval built in. Upload your data, call the API, and get accurate results from day one.

import { Agentset } from "agentset";

const agentset = new Agentset();
const ns = agentset.namespace("ns_1234");

const results = await ns.search(
  "What is multi-head attention?"
);

for (const result of results) {
  console.log(result.text);
}

Dataset Performance

By field

Comprehensive comparison of accuracy metrics (nDCG, Recall) and latency percentiles for each benchmark dataset.

business reports

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BQwen3 Embedding 0.6BDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.000
0.000
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.000
0.000
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
29ms
21ms
Average response time
P50
29ms
21ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
29ms
21ms
90th percentile

DBPedia

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BQwen3 Embedding 0.6BDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.799
0.716
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.787
0.730
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.061
0.053
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.119
0.105
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
26ms
13ms
Average response time
P50
26ms
13ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
26ms
13ms
90th percentile

FiQa

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BQwen3 Embedding 0.6BDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.838
0.755
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.836
0.755
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.719
0.591
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.839
0.683
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
23ms
19ms
Average response time
P50
23ms
19ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
23ms
19ms
90th percentile

SciFact

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BQwen3 Embedding 0.6BDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.666
0.658
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.697
0.666
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.782
0.718
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.891
0.779
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
38ms
62ms
Average response time
P50
38ms
62ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
38ms
62ms
90th percentile

MSMARCO

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BQwen3 Embedding 0.6BDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.974
0.943
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.954
0.933
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.124
0.122
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.224
0.215
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
31ms
15ms
Average response time
P50
31ms
15ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
31ms
15ms
90th percentile

ARCD

MetricQwen3 Embedding 4BQwen3 Embedding 0.6BDescription
Accuracy Metrics
nDCG@5
0.857
0.757
Ranking quality at top 5 results
nDCG@10
0.864
0.763
Ranking quality at top 10 results
Recall@5
0.940
0.880
% of relevant docs in top 5
Recall@10
0.960
0.900
% of relevant docs in top 10
Latency Metrics
Mean
25ms
18ms
Average response time
P50
25ms
18ms
50th percentile (median)
P90
25ms
18ms
90th percentile

Explore More

Compare more embeddings

See how all embedding models stack up. Compare OpenAI, Cohere, Jina AI, Voyage, and more. View comprehensive benchmarks, compare performance metrics, and find the perfect embedding for your RAG application.