Model comparison
Phi-4 Mini vs Qwen1.5-32B
Phi-4 Mini and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.4 vs 30.0), 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 24.8 to 13.5.
Side by side
| Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Microsoft | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.4 | 30.0 |
| 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 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-32B leads
Phi-4 Mini: 27.6 (#312), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 10.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Phi-4 Mini: 21.7 (#190), Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1131 |
Math Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |
Knowledge Phi-4 Mini leads
Phi-4 Mini: 24.8 (#261), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1176 |
| LMArena French | — | 1100 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1007 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1116 |
Long Context Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1146 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Phi-4 Mini: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)
| Benchmark | Phi-4 Mini | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1140 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Phi-4 Mini better than Qwen1.5-32B?
Phi-4 Mini and Qwen1.5-32B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (30.4 vs 30.0), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Phi-4 Mini or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.1 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Phi-4 Mini and Qwen1.5-32B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Phi-4 Mini has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.