Model Comparison
Phi-4
vs. Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Microsoft, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.5 2B (Reasoning)8 metric winsStrongest on: Input price, Output price, TTFT
Lowest Price
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Phi-4
28.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning)
2.9 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Phi-4.
Reasoning gap
Phi-4 leads Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning) by 9.8 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning) wins 8 measurable categories, including Input price, Output price, TTFT, Latency.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Phi-4
Microsoft
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Mi Phi-4 | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.13/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.50/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.22/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Microsoft | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Dec 12, 2024 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 33.1 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 497ms | — |
| Latency | 497ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 28.3 | 18.4 |
| Intelligence | 4.9 | 7.6 |
| Coding | — | 2.9 |
| Math | 18.0 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 57.5% | 45.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 71.4% | — |
| HLE | 4.1% | 2.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 23.1% | — |
| MATH 500 | 81.0% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 18.0% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 14.3% | — |
| SciCode | 26.0% | 2.8% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 23.7% |
| IFBench | 23.5% | 31.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 0.0% | 69.0% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 3.8% | 3.8% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Phi-4 has the strongest reasoning profile with a 28.3 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning) reaches a 2.9 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
Phi-4
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3.5 2B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
