Gemma 3n 2B (free) vs Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Gemma 3n 2B (free) (2025) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B (2026) are compact production models from Google DeepMind and Microsoft Research. Gemma 3n 2B (free) ships a 8k-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.
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is safer overall; choose Gemma 3n 2B (free) when provider fit matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Gemma 3n 2B (free) | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | general production evaluation | multimodal apps |
| Decision fit | General | Vision |
| Context window | 8k | — |
| Cheapest output | - | - |
| Provider routes | 1 tracked | 0 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 shared | 0 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- Gemma 3n 2B (free) has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Gemma 3n 2B (free) has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B uniquely exposes Vision and Multimodal in local model data.
- 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.
Gemma 3n 2B (free)
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
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Gemma 3n 2B (free) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B adds Vision and Multimodal in local capability data.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Gemma 3n 2B (free); plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision and Multimodal before moving production traffic.
Specs
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Gemma 3n 2B (free) | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | - |
| Output price | - | - |
| Providers | - |
Pricing not yet sourced for either model.
Capabilities
| Capability | Gemma 3n 2B (free) | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | No | No |
| Tool use | No | No |
| Structured outputs | No | 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 vision: Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and multimodal input: Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B. Both models share the core language-model surface, 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: Gemma 3n 2B (free) 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 Gemma 3n 2B (free) when provider fit 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 Gemma 3n 2B (free) or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B open source?
Gemma 3n 2B (free) is listed under Gemma. 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, Gemma 3n 2B (free) or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for multimodal input, Gemma 3n 2B (free) or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Gemma 3n 2B (free) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Gemma 3n 2B (free) is available on NVIDIA NIM. 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.
When should I pick Gemma 3n 2B (free) over Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is safer overall; choose Gemma 3n 2B (free) when provider fit matters. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Gemma 3n 2B (free); if it depends on vision-heavy evaluation, run the same evaluation with Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-04. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.