LLM Reference

Fugu vs Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B

Fugu (2026) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B (2026) are frontier reasoning models from Sakana AI and Microsoft Research. Fugu 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 is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation matters.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalFuguPhi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Best forreasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agentsmultimodal apps
Decision fitCoding, RAG, and AgentsVision
Context window1m
Cheapest output--
Provider routes1 tracked0 tracked
Shared benchmarks0 shared0 shared

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Fugu when...
  • Fugu has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
  • Fugu has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
  • Fugu uniquely exposes Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local model data.
  • Local decision data tags Fugu for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when...
  • 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

Unavailable

No complete token price in local provider data

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

Fugu -> Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
  • No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Fugu 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.
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B -> Fugu
  • No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Fugu; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
  • Fugu adds Reasoning, Function calling, and Tool use in local capability data.

Specs

Specification
Released2026-06-222026-03-12
Context window1m
Parameters15B
ArchitectureComposition of Experts-
LicenseProprietaryMITOSI-approved
OpennessProprietaryOpen source
Commercial useCommercial use: conditionalCommercial use: permitted
Knowledge cutoff-2025-03

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeFuguPhi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Input price--
Output price--
Providers-

Pricing not yet sourced for either model.

Capabilities

CapabilityFuguPhi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
VisionYesYes
MultimodalYesYes
ReasoningYesNo
Function callingYesNo
Tool useYesNo
Structured outputsYesNo
Code executionNoNo
IDE integrationNoNo
Computer useNoNo
Parallel agentsNoNo

Benchmarks

No shared benchmark scores are currently available for this pair.

Deep dive

The capability footprint differs most on reasoning mode: Fugu, function calling: Fugu, tool use: Fugu, and structured outputs: Fugu. 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 has no token price sourced yet and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 1 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 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. For teams standardizing a stack, that distinction is often the difference between a benchmark win and a reliable deployment.

FAQ

Is Fugu or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B open source?

Fugu 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 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Both Fugu 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. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.

Which is better for multimodal input, Fugu or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Both Fugu 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 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Fugu 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 or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Fugu 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 and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Fugu is available on Sakana AI. 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.