+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3 Opus vs Phi 4 Reasoning
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Phi 4 Reasoning leads with 10.6% higher average benchmark score. Claude 3 Opus supports multimodal inputs. Claude 3 Opus is available on 3 providers. Overall, Phi 4 Reasoning is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus was developed as the most capable model in the Claude 3 family, designed to set new industry benchmarks across a wide range of cognitive tasks. Built to handle complex analysis and extended tasks requiring deep reasoning, it balanced frontier intelligence with careful safety considerations, representing the flagship tier of the Claude 3 generation.
+
+
+
+
Microsoft
Phi-4 Reasoning was developed to incorporate extended analytical thinking into the Phi-4 architecture, designed to spend more time on complex problem-solving. Built to combine compact model efficiency with reasoning depth, it represents Microsoft's exploration of thoughtful small models.
1 year newer
Claude 3 Opus
Anthropic
2024-02-29
Phi 4 Reasoning
Microsoft
2025-04-30
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Opus
Average Score:59.5%
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Reasoning
Average Score:70.0%(+10.6%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Phi 4 Reasoning
2025-03-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Opus
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 120 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3 Opus
Avg Score:59.5%
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Reasoning
Avg Score:70.0%(+10.6%)
Providers:0