Claude Opus 4.5 vs Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Claude Opus 4.5 (2025) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B (2026) are frontier reasoning models from Anthropic and Microsoft Research. Claude Opus 4.5 ships a 200k-token context window, while Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B ships a not-yet-sourced context window. On Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding, Claude Opus 4.5 leads by 26.4 pts. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is safer overall; choose Claude Opus 4.5 when coding workflow support matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Opus 4.5 | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | multimodal apps |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Vision |
| Context window | 200k | — |
| Cheapest output | $25/1M tokens | - |
| Provider routes | 6 tracked | 0 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding leader | 1 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Claude Opus 4.5 holds a shared-benchmark lead on Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding, ahead by 26.4 points.
- Claude Opus 4.5 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Claude Opus 4.5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Claude Opus 4.5 uniquely exposes Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Claude Opus 4.5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Local decision data tags Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B for Vision.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Opus 4.5
$10,250
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Microsoft Foundry
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Claude Opus 4.5 and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use before moving production traffic.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Claude Opus 4.5; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Claude Opus 4.5 adds Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2025-11-01 | 2026-03-12 |
| Context window | 200k | — |
| Parameters | — | 15B |
| Architecture | decoder only | - |
| License | Proprietary | MIT(OSI) |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Commercial use | Commercial use with conditions | Commercial use allowed |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-12 | 2025-03 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Opus 4.5 | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $5/1M tokens | - |
| Output price | $25/1M tokens | - |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Opus 4.5 | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Function calling | Yes | No |
| Tool use | Yes | No |
| Structured outputs | Yes | No |
| Code execution | Yes | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding | 80.7 | 54.3 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding has Claude Opus 4.5 at 80.7 and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B at 54.3, with Claude Opus 4.5 ahead by 26.4 points. The largest visible gap is 26.4 points on Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint differs most on reasoning mode: Claude Opus 4.5, function calling: Claude Opus 4.5, tool use: Claude Opus 4.5, structured outputs: Claude Opus 4.5, and code execution: Claude Opus 4.5. Both models share vision and multimodal input, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
Pricing coverage is uneven: Claude Opus 4.5 has $5/1M input tokens and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 6 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Claude Opus 4.5 when coding workflow support and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Is Claude Opus 4.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B open source?
Claude Opus 4.5 is listed under Proprietary. Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is listed under MIT. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Claude Opus 4.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Both Claude Opus 4.5 and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Which is better for multimodal input, Claude Opus 4.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Both Claude Opus 4.5 and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Which is better for reasoning mode, Claude Opus 4.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the clearer documented reasoning mode signal in this comparison. If reasoning mode is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for function calling, Claude Opus 4.5 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has the clearer documented function calling signal in this comparison. If function calling is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Claude Opus 4.5 and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Claude Opus 4.5 is available on Microsoft Foundry, Anthropic, GCP Vertex AI, AWS Bedrock, and OpenRouter. Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is available on the tracked providers still being sourced. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-04. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.