Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs phi-4
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,436.25100% of row best · rating · gemini-3.5-flash-lite; 95% CI [1431.05053629, 1441.44358777]; votes 21843; rank 74 | 1,216.4985% of row best · rating · phi-4; 95% CI [1211.91444642, 1221.07047082]; votes 24126; rank 296 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 1 benchmark winOverall lead | 0 benchmark wins |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | phi-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Microsoft |
| Family | Gemini 3 | Phi 4 |
| Model | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | phi-4 |
| Version | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | phi-4 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | 2024-12-12 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video, Audio, Document | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,048,576 | 16,384 |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 14,659,507,200 |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | mit |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Google AI (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation |
13 comparable fields · 10 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Capabilities
phi-4 Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
Gemini 3 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
 Nova 2 LiteAmazon | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Qwen3.8-FlashQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini Computer UseGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
Gemini Deep ResearchGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Phi-4-reasoningMicrosoft | vs | phi-4Microsoft | family variantstext |
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle DeepMind | vs | GPT-4.1 MiniOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Phi-4-multimodal-instructMicrosoft | vs | phi-4Microsoft | family variantstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs phi-4 FAQs
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and phi-4, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is $0.30 and phi-4 is $0.070 per million tokens, so phi-4 is cheaper on this metric. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is $2.50 and phi-4 is $0.14 per million tokens, so phi-4 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite supports 1,048,576 and phi-4 supports 16,384.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4 be self-hosted?+
phi-4 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is not marked open weight; phi-4 is open weight.
Can Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and phi-4 understand images?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is documented with image input; phi-4 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is 65,536 and phi-4 is —.
Do Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and phi-4 support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. phi-4: none of these features are definitively sourced. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4?+
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has 1 sourced provider route; phi-4 has 2, so phi-4 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or phi-4?+
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.