+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct vs Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning leads with 5.3% higher average benchmark score. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports multimodal inputs. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available on 5 providers. Overall, Phi 4 Mini Reasoning is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B was developed as a flagship-tier open-source model, designed to provide advanced capabilities with 90 billion parameters. Built to serve applications requiring high-quality reasoning and generation, it represents a powerful option within the Llama 3.2 series for demanding tasks.
+
+
+
+
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 90B 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 90B Instruct
Average Score:46.7%
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
Average Score:52.0%(+5.3%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
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 90B Instruct
5 providers
Bedrock
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
DeepInfra
Throughput: 24 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Fireworks
Throughput: 50 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Hyperbolic
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Together
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:46.7%
Providers:5
+
+
+
+
Phi 4 Mini Reasoning
Avg Score:52.0%(+5.3%)
Providers:0