+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude Opus 4 vs Phi 4 Reasoning
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Claude Opus 4 leads with 13.2% higher average benchmark score. Claude Opus 4 supports multimodal inputs. Claude Opus 4 is available on 4 providers. Overall, Claude Opus 4 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4 was developed as the flagship model in the Claude 4 generation, designed to push the boundaries of AI capability in complex reasoning, analysis, and multi-step problem-solving. Built to handle the most demanding enterprise tasks, it represents Anthropic's highest tier of intelligence and capability.
+
+
+
+
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.
22 days newer
Phi 4 Reasoning
Microsoft
2025-04-30
Claude Opus 4
Anthropic
2025-05-22
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude Opus 4
Average Score:77.6%(+13.2%)
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Reasoning
Average Score:64.3%
+
+
+
+
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 Opus 4
4 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 120 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
ZeroEval
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
Claude Opus 4
Avg Score:77.6%(+13.2%)
Providers:4
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Reasoning
Avg Score:64.3%
Providers:0