Model comparison

Gemma 2 2b IT vs Phi-4

Gemma 2 2b IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.1 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 2b IT Google

33.1

Rank #248 Confirmed

Phi-4 Microsoft

31.2

Rank #279 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 2b IT scores higher in 2 categories and Phi-4 in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Gemma 2 2b IT leads 32.6 to 20.8.

Side by side

Gemma 2 2b IT and Phi-4 specifications
Gemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
ProviderGoogleMicrosoft
Noometry Index33.131.2
Released—2024-12-11
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—128K
Max output—4K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.07
Output $ / M tokens—$0.14
Results tracked1737

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Phi-4 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#273), Phi-4: 34.4 (#239)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Coding11121231
BigCodeBench Instruct—45.5%
LiveBench Coding—30.7%
BigCodeBench Complete—55.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 2b IT: —, Phi-4: 22.8 (#128)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.8%
BALROG—11.6%

Reasoning Gemma 2 2b IT leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 21.4 (#224), Phi-4: 17.7 (#291)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Hard Prompts11131220
Chess Puzzles—1%
LiveBench Reasoning—47.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—45.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—130.42
LiveBench—41.6%

Math Gemma 2 2b IT leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.6 (#212), Phi-4: 20.8 (#285)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Math11351246
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—13.8%
LiveBench Math—42%
MATH Level 5—64.9%

Knowledge Phi-4 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 29.9 (#231), Phi-4: 32.6 (#209)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Expert10961203
GPQA Diamond—56.1%
Confabulations—29.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—3.7%
MMLU—84.8%

Multilingual Phi-4 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 32.3 (#257), Phi-4: 37.2 (#237)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Non-English11211197
LMArena Chinese11321212
LMArena French11571224
LMArena German11141222
LMArena Japanese10831158
LMArena Korean10551151
LMArena Russian11181209
LMArena Spanish11401234

Instruction Following Phi-4 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 57.8 (#263), Phi-4: 60.4 (#251)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Instruction Following11181201
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.4%

Long Context Phi-4 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 34.3 (#250), Phi-4: 36.9 (#226)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Longer Query11301217

Writing & Preference Phi-4 leads

Gemma 2 2b IT: 36.5 (#263), Phi-4: 40.5 (#244)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 2b ITPhi-4
LMArena Text11561217
LMArena Creative Writing11471182
LMArena Multi-Turn11181206
Short-Story Creative Writing—62.6%
LiveBench Language—25.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 2b IT better than Phi-4?

Gemma 2 2b IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.1 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 2b IT or Phi-4 better for coding?

Phi-4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.4 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 2b IT and Phi-4 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 2b IT has 17 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper