Fugu Ultra vs Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Fugu Ultra (2026) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B (2026) are frontier reasoning models from Sakana AI and Microsoft Research. Fugu Ultra ships a 1m-token context window, while Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B ships a not-yet-sourced context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
Fugu Ultra is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Fugu Ultra | 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 | 1m | — |
| Cheapest output | $30/1M tokens | - |
| Provider routes | 2 tracked | 0 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 shared | 0 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- Fugu Ultra has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Fugu Ultra has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Fugu Ultra uniquely exposes Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Fugu Ultra 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.
Fugu Ultra
$11,500
Cheapest tracked route/tier: Sakana AI <=272K tokens
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 Fugu Ultra 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 Fugu Ultra; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Fugu Ultra adds Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-06-22 | 2026-03-12 |
| Context window | 1m | — |
| Parameters | — | 15B |
| Architecture | Composition of Experts | - |
| License | Proprietary | MITOSI-approved |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Commercial use | Commercial use: conditional | Commercial use: permitted |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | 2025-03 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Fugu Ultra | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price |
| - |
| Output price |
| - |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Capability | Fugu Ultra | 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 | No | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark scores are currently available for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on reasoning mode: Fugu Ultra, function calling: Fugu Ultra, tool use: Fugu Ultra, and structured outputs: Fugu Ultra. 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: Fugu Ultra has $5/1M input tokens and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 2 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Fugu Ultra when reasoning depth 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. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.
FAQ
Is Fugu Ultra or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B open source?
Fugu Ultra 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, Fugu Ultra or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Both Fugu Ultra 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, Fugu Ultra or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Both Fugu Ultra 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, Fugu Ultra or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Fugu Ultra 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, Fugu Ultra or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Fugu Ultra 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 Fugu Ultra and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Fugu Ultra is available on Sakana AI and Vercel AI Gateway. 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: 2026-06-22. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.