Model comparison

Phi-4 Mini vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Phi-4 Mini Microsoft

30.9

Rank #283 Reported

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Phi-4 Mini scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 43.2 to 25.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Vectara Hallucination Rate: 23.5% for Phi-4 Mini and 10.5% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
  • Phi-4 Mini is cheaper at $0.075 / $0.30 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.40 for Qwen3.5-Flash.
  • Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Phi-4 Mini has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Phi-4 Mini and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
Phi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderMicrosoftAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index30.942.5
Released2024-12-112026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output4K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.075$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$0.30$0.40
Results tracked332

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Phi-4 Mini: 28.1 (#317), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena WebDev—1244
SciCode10.8%—
LMArena Coding—1412
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Phi-4 Mini: 22.4 (#195), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles—21%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1403
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
LMArena Math—1407
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Phi-4 Mini: 25.3 (#262), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
Vectara Hallucination Rate23.5%10.5%
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
LMArena Expert—1407

Multilingual Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English—1385
LMArena Chinese—1446
LMArena French—1412
LMArena German—1390
LMArena Japanese—1368
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Russian—1379
LMArena Spanish—1400

Instruction Following Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following—1374

Long Context Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1392

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4 MiniQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text—1397
LMArena Creative Writing—1343
LMArena Multi-Turn—1393

Frequently asked questions

Is Phi-4 Mini better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Phi-4 Mini or Qwen3.5-Flash?

Phi-4 Mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-Flash lists at $0.10 and $0.40.

Is Phi-4 Mini or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Qwen3.5-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.2 versus 28.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Phi-4 Mini and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Phi-4 Mini has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper