Model comparison
Phi-4 vs Qwen-7B
Phi-4 has enough public results to be ranked (#269); Qwen-7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Microsoft
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both.
Side by side
| Phi-4 | Qwen-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.9 | — |
| Released | 2024-12-11 | 2023-09-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.07 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.14 | — |
| Results tracked | 37 | 8 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Phi-4: 33.8 (#237), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.5% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 30.7% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1231 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 55.4% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Phi-4: 22.6 (#120), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 28.8% | — |
| BALROG | 11.6% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Phi-4: 17.0 (#287), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.43 | 106.47 |
| Chess Puzzles | 1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 47.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1220 | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 45.2% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 45% |
| LAMBADA | — | 67.9% |
| LiveBench | 41.6% | — |
| PIQA | — | 77.9% |
Math Not comparable
Phi-4: 19.6 (#279), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 13.8% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 42% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1246 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 64.9% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 51.7% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Phi-4: 32.5 (#204), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 84.8% | 45% |
| GPQA Diamond | 56.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 29.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1203 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 75.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 76.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Phi-4: 37.4 (#232), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1197 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1211 | — |
| LMArena French | 1223 | — |
| LMArena German | 1222 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1158 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1151 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1234 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Phi-4: 60.6 (#246), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1201 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Phi-4: 36.9 (#221), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1217 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Phi-4: 40.7 (#239), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Phi-4 | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1217 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1182 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 62.6% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1206 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Phi-4 better than Qwen-7B?
Phi-4 has enough public results to be ranked (#269); Qwen-7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do Phi-4 and Qwen-7B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-4 has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-7B has 8.