Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale vs Phi-4
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 costs 9.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
MicrosoftSummary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads 32.9 to 17.7.
- Phi-4 is cheaper at $0.07 / $0.14 per million input/output tokens, against $0.58 / $1.68 for DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 39.7 | 31.2 |
| Released | 2025-12-01 | 2024-12-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 128K |
| Max output | 128K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.58 | $0.07 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.68 | $0.14 |
| Results tracked | 3 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 40.4 (#140), Phi-4: 34.4 (#239)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 46.7% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.5% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 30.7% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1231 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 55.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Phi-4: 22.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.8% |
| BALROG | — | 11.6% |
Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 32.9 (#73), Phi-4: 17.7 (#291)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 52.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 1% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 47.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1220 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 45.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 130.42 |
| LiveBench | — | 41.6% |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Phi-4: 20.8 (#285)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 13.8% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 42% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1246 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 64.9% |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Phi-4: 32.6 (#209)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 29.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 3.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1203 |
| MMLU | — | 84.8% |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Phi-4: 37.2 (#237)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1197 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1212 |
| LMArena French | — | 1224 |
| LMArena German | — | 1222 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1158 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1151 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1209 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1234 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Phi-4: 60.4 (#251)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.4% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1201 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Phi-4: 36.9 (#226)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1217 |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 46.0 (#222), Phi-4: 40.5 (#244)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1217 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1182 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 62.6% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1276 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1206 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 25.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale better than Phi-4?
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 costs 9.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or Phi-4?
Phi-4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.07 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale lists at $0.58 and $1.68.
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or Phi-4 better for coding?
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 128K tokens.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and Phi-4 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has 3 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 has 37.