Claude Opus 5.5 vs Phi-4 Reasoning

At a Glance

Compare
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$4.00Anthropic · Sep 22, 2026Not reported
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$20.00Anthropic · Sep 22, 2026Not reported
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,000K33K
Model facts checkedSep 22, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldClaude Opus 5.5Phi-4-reasoning
DeveloperAnthropicMicrosoft
FamilyClaude 5 5Phi 4 Reasoning
ModelClaude Opus 5.5Phi-4-reasoning
VersionClaude Opus 5.5Phi-4-reasoning
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-222025-04-30
Knowledge cutoff2026-06-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K33K
Total parametersUnknown14.7B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownmit
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesUnknown
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard)Unknown
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning
Message Batches max output (beta)300000 tokensUnknown
Default effortmediumUnknown
Retirement commitmentNot sooner than September 22, 2027Unknown
ThinkingAdaptive (always on)Unknown

Claude Opus 5.5 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers1
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-opus-5-5

Phi-4 Reasoning Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoning
Serving providers0
Canonical IDmicrosoft/Phi-4-reasoning

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Phi-4 Reasoning FAQs

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 5.5 and Phi-4 Reasoning, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning?+

Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a directly sourced input price: $4.00 per million tokens. Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a directly sourced output price: $20.00 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning?+

Claude Opus 5.5 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1,000K and Phi-4 Reasoning supports 33K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning be self-hosted?+

Phi-4 Reasoning is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 5.5 is not marked open weight; Phi-4 Reasoning is open weight.

Can Claude Opus 5.5 and Phi-4 Reasoning understand images?+

Claude Opus 5.5 is documented with image input; Phi-4 Reasoning is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 5.5 is 128K and Phi-4 Reasoning is —.

Do Claude Opus 5.5 and Phi-4 Reasoning support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Opus 5.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Phi-4 Reasoning: reasoning. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning?+

Claude Opus 5.5 has 1 sourced provider route; Phi-4 Reasoning has 0, so Claude Opus 5.5 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Opus 5.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback