+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Phi 4
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads with 8.1% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite offers 1.1M more tokens in context window than Phi 4. Both models have similar pricing. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite was created as the most efficient option in the Gemini 2.5 family, designed to provide cutting-edge capabilities with minimal computational overhead. Built for applications where cost and latency are primary concerns, it extends advanced multimodal understanding to resource-conscious deployments.
+
+
+
+
Microsoft
Phi-4 was introduced as the fourth generation of Microsoft's small language model series, designed to push the boundaries of what compact models can achieve. Built with advanced training techniques and architectural improvements, it demonstrates continued progress in efficient, high-quality language models.
6 months newer
Phi 4
Microsoft
2024-12-12
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
2025-06-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.40
+
+
+
+
Phi 4
Input:$0.07
Output:$0.14($0.29 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Average Score:37.6%(+8.1%)
+
+
+
+
Phi 4
Average Score:29.6%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Phi 4
2024-06-01
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
2025-01-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
1 providers
Throughput: 5.69 tok/s
Latency: 0.44ms
+
+
+
+
Phi 4
+
+
+
+
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Avg Score:37.6%(+8.1%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Phi 4
Avg Score:29.6%
Providers:1