Model comparison
Gemma 2 9B vs Phi-4 Mini
Phi-4 Mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.9 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
MicrosoftSummary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Phi-4 Mini leads 25.3 to 9.7.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 30.9 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2024-12-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.075 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Results tracked | 35 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemma 2 9B leads
Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 10.8% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1173 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |
Reasoning Phi-4 Mini leads
Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1171 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.83 | — |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |
Knowledge Phi-4 Mini leads
Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 23.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | — |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | — |
| LMArena French | 1190 | — |
| LMArena German | 1186 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 9B better than Phi-4 Mini?
Phi-4 Mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.9 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 9B or Phi-4 Mini better for coding?
Gemma 2 9B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.4 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and Phi-4 Mini share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 Mini has 3.