Model comparison

Phi-4 Mini vs Qwen3 32B

Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Phi-4 Mini costs 9.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 32B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 11, 2026. 3 shared benchmarks.

Phi-4 Mini

Microsoft

30.9

Rank #283 Reported

Qwen3 32B

Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Phi-4 Mini scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 32B in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 32B leads 40.0 to 25.3.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 10.8% for Phi-4 Mini and 35.4% for Qwen3 32B.
Phi-4 Mini is cheaper at $0.075 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
Qwen3 32B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Phi-4 Mini and Qwen3 32B specifications
	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
Provider	Microsoft	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	30.9	39.2
Released	2024-12-11	2025-04
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	128K	131K
Max output	4K	16K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.075	$0.70
Output $ / M tokens	$0.30	$2.80
Results tracked	3	26

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 32B leads

Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
SciCode	10.8%	35.4%
Aider Polyglot	—	40%
LMArena Coding	—	1358

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	—	48.7%

Reasoning Phi-4 Mini leads

Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
CritPt	0%	0.3%
Kagi LLM Benchmark	—	54.9%
Chess Puzzles	—	5%
LMArena Hard Prompts	—	1334
DTBench	—	67.5%
LMCA	—	17.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	138.51

Math Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	66.9%
LMArena Math	—	1399

Knowledge Qwen3 32B leads

Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
Vectara Hallucination Rate	23.5%	5.9%
GPQA Diamond	—	65.7%
LMArena Expert	—	1362

Multilingual Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English	—	1317
LMArena Chinese	—	1357
LMArena German	—	1341
LMArena Russian	—	1311

Instruction Following Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following	—	1305

Long Context Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
Fiction.LiveBench	—	74.2%
LMArena Longer Query	—	1327

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Phi-4 Mini	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text	—	1340
LMArena Creative Writing	—	1297
LMArena Multi-Turn	—	1331

Frequently asked questions

Is Phi-4 Mini better than Qwen3 32B?

Which is cheaper, Phi-4 Mini or Qwen3 32B?

Phi-4 Mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Is Phi-4 Mini or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 32B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Phi-4 Mini and Qwen3 32B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-4 Mini has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.