Noometry

Model comparison

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 vs Phi-4

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 Tencent

41.3

Rank #139 Confirmed

Phi-4 Microsoft

31.2

Rank #279 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 scores higher in 8 categories and Phi-4 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads 57.4 to 40.5.
  • Phi-4 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
ProviderTencentMicrosoft
Noometry Index41.331.2
Released—2024-12-11
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—128K
Max output—4K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.07
Output $ / M tokens—$0.14
Results tracked1637

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

Category by category

Coding Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 40.0 (#152), Phi-4: 34.4 (#239)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Coding13611231
BigCodeBench Instruct—45.5%
LiveBench Coding—30.7%
BigCodeBench Complete—55.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: —, Phi-4: 22.8 (#128)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.8%
BALROG—11.6%

Reasoning Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 27.8 (#113), Phi-4: 17.7 (#291)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Hard Prompts13741220
Chess Puzzles—1%
LiveBench Reasoning—47.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—45.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—130.42
LiveBench—41.6%

Math Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.5 (#154), Phi-4: 20.8 (#285)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Math13591246
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—13.8%
LiveBench Math—42%
MATH Level 5—64.9%

Knowledge Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.0 (#161), Phi-4: 32.6 (#209)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Expert13391203
GPQA Diamond—56.1%
Confabulations—29.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—3.7%
MMLU—84.8%

Multilingual Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 48.9 (#136), Phi-4: 37.2 (#237)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Non-English13631197
LMArena Chinese14171212
LMArena French13911224
LMArena German13551222
LMArena Japanese13421158
LMArena Korean13511151
LMArena Russian13681209
LMArena Spanish—1234

Instruction Following Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 71.0 (#158), Phi-4: 60.4 (#251)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Instruction Following13441201
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.4%

Long Context Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 41.6 (#136), Phi-4: 36.9 (#226)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Longer Query13661217

Writing & Preference Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 57.4 (#128), Phi-4: 40.5 (#244)

BenchmarkHunyuan Turbos 20250226Phi-4
LMArena Text13771217
LMArena Creative Writing13591182
LMArena Multi-Turn13871206
Short-Story Creative Writing—62.6%
LiveBench Language—25.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 better than Phi-4?

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 or Phi-4 better for coding?

Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 and Phi-4 share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 has 16 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper