+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct vs Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning leads with 19.2% higher average benchmark score. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct supports multimodal inputs. Llama 3.2 11B Instruct is available on 6 providers. Overall, Phi 4 Mini Reasoning is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 11B was introduced as a mid-sized variant in the Llama 3.2 family, designed to offer enhanced capabilities while maintaining efficiency. Built to provide a balanced option for applications requiring more than lightweight models but less than flagship sizes, it serves diverse use cases in the open-source community.
+
+
+
+
Microsoft
Phi-4 Mini Reasoning was developed to incorporate extended thinking capabilities into the ultra-compact Phi-4 Mini architecture. Built to demonstrate that reasoning enhancements can be applied even to very small models, it brings analytical depth to resource-constrained environments.
7 months newer
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
Microsoft
2025-04-30
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Average Score:32.8%
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
Average Score:52.0%(+19.2%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
2023-12-31
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
2025-02-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
6 providers
Bedrock
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
DeepInfra
Throughput: 108 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Fireworks
Throughput: 125 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
Groq
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Sambanova
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 11B Instruct
Avg Score:32.8%
Providers:6
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
Avg Score:52.0%(+19.2%)
Providers:0