Model comparison

Llama 13b vs Phi-4

Phi-4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.2 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Llama 13b Meta

24.4

Rank #348 Confirmed

Phi-4 Microsoft

31.2

Rank #279 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 13b scores higher in 1 category and Phi-4 in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Phi-4 leads 40.5 to 13.8.

Side by side

Llama 13b and Phi-4 specifications
Llama 13bPhi-4
ProviderMetaMicrosoft
Noometry Index24.431.2
Released2023-02-242024-12-11
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—128K
Max output—4K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.07
Output $ / M tokens—$0.14
Results tracked2137

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

Category by category

Coding Phi-4 leads

Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337), Phi-4: 34.4 (#239)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
LMArena Coding6831231
BigCodeBench Instruct—45.5%
LiveBench Coding—30.7%
BigCodeBench Complete—55.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Phi-4: 22.8 (#128)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.8%
BALROG—11.6%

Reasoning Phi-4 leads

Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329), Phi-4: 17.7 (#291)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
LMArena Hard Prompts7281220
Epoch Capabilities Index100.58130.42
Chess Puzzles—1%
LiveBench Reasoning—47.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—45.2%
BIG-Bench Hard37.9%—
HellaSwag79.2%—
LAMBADA75.2%—
LiveBench—41.6%
PIQA80.1%—
WinoGrande73%—

Math Llama 13b leads

Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256), Phi-4: 20.8 (#285)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
LMArena Math8381246
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—13.8%
LiveBench Math—42%
MATH Level 5—64.9%
GSM8K20.6%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Phi-4: 32.6 (#209)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
MMLU47.7%84.8%
GPQA Diamond—56.1%
Confabulations—29.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—3.7%
LMArena Expert—1203
ARC (AI2) Challenge52.7%—
BoolQ78.7%—
OpenBookQA56.4%—
TriviaQA77.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Phi-4: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
ScienceQA43.3%—

Multilingual Phi-4 leads

Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297), Phi-4: 37.2 (#237)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
LMArena Non-English8191197
LMArena Chinese—1212
LMArena French—1224
LMArena German—1222
LMArena Japanese—1158
LMArena Korean—1151
LMArena Russian—1209
LMArena Spanish—1234

Instruction Following Phi-4 leads

Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305), Phi-4: 60.4 (#251)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
LMArena Instruction Following7811201
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.4%

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 13b: —, Phi-4: 36.9 (#226)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
LMArena Longer Query—1217

Writing & Preference Phi-4 leads

Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312), Phi-4: 40.5 (#244)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 13bPhi-4
LMArena Text8341217
LMArena Creative Writing7941182
LMArena Multi-Turn7531206
Short-Story Creative Writing—62.6%
LiveBench Language—25.6%

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 13b better than Phi-4?

Phi-4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.2 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 13b or Phi-4 better for coding?

Phi-4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.4 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Phi-4 share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper