Model comparison
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent vs Phi-4
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent scores higher in 8 categories and Phi-4 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads 43.9 to 17.7.
- Phi-4 is cheaper at $0.07 / $0.14 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent.
- Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Phi-4 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 46.2 | 31.2 |
| Released | 2026-03-09 | 2024-12-11 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 128K |
| Max output | 30K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.07 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.14 |
| Results tracked | 20 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.0 (#92), Phi-4: 34.4 (#239)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1457 | 1231 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.5% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 30.7% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 55.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: —, Phi-4: 22.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.8% |
| BALROG | — | 11.6% |
| LMArena Search | 1204 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.9 (#48), Phi-4: 17.7 (#291)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1448 | 1220 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 1% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 47.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 45.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 130.42 |
| LiveBench | — | 41.6% |
Math Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 39.4 (#104), Phi-4: 20.8 (#285)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1442 | 1246 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 13.8% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 42% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 64.9% |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.4 (#119), Phi-4: 32.6 (#209)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1445 | 1203 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 29.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 3.7% |
| MMLU | — | 84.8% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 40.5 (#48), Phi-4: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1259 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 54.4 (#43), Phi-4: 37.2 (#237)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1197 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1475 | 1212 |
| LMArena French | 1466 | 1224 |
| LMArena German | 1456 | 1222 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | 1158 |
| LMArena Korean | 1416 | 1151 |
| LMArena Russian | 1457 | 1209 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1447 | 1234 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 74.8 (#84), Phi-4: 60.4 (#251)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1201 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.4% |
Long Context Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 43.7 (#88), Phi-4: 36.9 (#226)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1431 | 1217 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent leads
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent: 64.0 (#59), Phi-4: 40.5 (#244)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent | Phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1450 | 1217 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | 1182 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1452 | 1206 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 62.6% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 25.6% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent better than Phi-4?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.2 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent or Phi-4?
Phi-4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.07 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent or Phi-4 better for coding?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.0 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent and Phi-4 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent has 20 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 has 37.