+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3n E4B vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct leads with 15.6% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3n E4B supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3N E4B was developed as a slightly larger edge-optimized variant, designed to provide enhanced capabilities while still fitting within edge computing constraints. Built to serve applications that can accommodate more parameters for improved quality, it expands the range of edge deployment options.
+
+
+
+
Microsoft
Phi-3.5 MoE was created using a mixture-of-experts architecture, designed to provide enhanced capabilities while maintaining efficiency through sparse activation. Built to combine the benefits of larger models with practical computational requirements, it represents Microsoft's exploration of efficient scaling techniques.
10 months newer
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Microsoft
2024-08-23
Gemma 3n E4B
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Average performance across 7 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Average Score:68.2%
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Average Score:83.8%(+15.6%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3n E4B
2024-06-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Avg Score:68.2%
Providers:0
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Avg Score:83.8%(+15.6%)
Providers:0