Model comparison
Llama 2-7B vs Phi-4 Mini
Phi-4 Mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Meta
MicrosoftSummary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Phi-4 Mini leads 22.4 to 15.7.
Side by side
| Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 30.9 |
| Released | 2023-07-18 | 2024-12-11 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.075 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Llama 2-7B leads
Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307), Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 10.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1002 | — |
Reasoning Phi-4 Mini leads
Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312), Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1009 | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 39.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 99.06 | — |
| HellaSwag | 77.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 73.3% | — |
| PIQA | 78.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 69.2% | — |
Math Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1042 | — |
| GSM8K | 16.7% | — |
Knowledge Llama 2-7B leads
Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248), Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 23.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1036 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 45.9% | — |
| BoolQ | 77.9% | — |
| MMLU | 45.8% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 58.6% | — |
| TriviaQA | 73.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: —, Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.1% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 973 | — |
| LMArena French | 970 | — |
| LMArena German | 978 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 995 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1007 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1006 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 999 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298), Phi-4 Mini: —
| Benchmark | Llama 2-7B | Phi-4 Mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1053 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1029 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 2-7B better than Phi-4 Mini?
Phi-4 Mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 2-7B or Phi-4 Mini better for coding?
Llama 2-7B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 29.2 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and Phi-4 Mini share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and Phi-4 Mini has 3.