Model Comparison
Phi-4
vs. Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Microsoft, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning)14 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Best Value
Phi-4
100.0 value score
28.3 reasoning / $0.22/1M
Lowest Price
Phi-4
$0.13/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning)
54.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning)
17.4 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
Phi-4 has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Phi-4 is 4.0x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning) generates about 5.8x as many tokens per second as Phi-4.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning) leads Phi-4 by 26.3 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning) wins 14 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, Math.
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 Next 80B A3B (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 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.13/1M | $0.50/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.50/1M | $6.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.22/1M | $1.88/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Microsoft | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Dec 12, 2024 | Sep 11, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 31.8 tok/s | 184.1 tok/s |
| TTFT | 504ms | 1244ms |
| Latency | 504ms | 12109ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 22.5 |
| Reasoning Score | 28.3 | 54.6 |
| Intelligence | 4.9 | 16.7 |
| Coding | — | 17.4 |
| Math | 18.0 | 84.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 57.5% | 75.9% |
| MMLU Pro | 71.4% | 82.4% |
| HLE | 4.1% | 11.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 23.1% | 78.4% |
| MATH 500 | 81.0% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 18.0% | 84.3% |
| AIME (Original) | 14.3% | — |
| SciCode | 26.0% | 38.8% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 60.3% |
| IFBench | 23.5% | 60.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 0.0% | 41.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 3.8% | 9.8% |
Key Takeaways
Phi-4 offers the best value at $0.13/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 54.6 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning) reaches a 17.4 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
Phi-4
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
