Model comparison
Phi-4 Mini vs Qwen1.5-72B
Phi-4 Mini and Qwen1.5-72B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.9 vs 30.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Microsoft
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Phi-4 Mini leads 25.3 to 11.5.
Side by side
| Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.9 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2024-12-11 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.075 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Results tracked | 3 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-72B leads
Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 10.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1165 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195), Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1148 |
Math Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1164 |
Knowledge Phi-4 Mini leads
Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1136 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1186 |
| LMArena French | — | 1159 |
| LMArena German | — | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1050 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1110 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1141 |
Long Context Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1157 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Phi-4 Mini better than Qwen1.5-72B?
Phi-4 Mini and Qwen1.5-72B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.9 vs 30.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Phi-4 Mini or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.9 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Phi-4 Mini and Qwen1.5-72B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-4 Mini has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.