Gemma 4 12B vs Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning
Gemma 4 12B (2026) and Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning (2025) are frontier-tier reasoning models from Google DeepMind and Microsoft Research. Gemma 4 12B ships a 256k-token context window, while Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning ships a 128k-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
Gemma 4 12B is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning when provider fit matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Gemma 4 12B | Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents | reasoning-heavy apps |
| Decision fit | RAG, Agents, and Long context | Long context |
| Context window | 256k | 128k |
| Cheapest output | - | - |
| Provider routes | 2 tracked | 1 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Gemma 4 12B has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Gemma 4 12B has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Gemma 4 12B uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Function calling in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Gemma 4 12B for RAG, Agents, and Long context.
- Local decision data tags Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning for Long context.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Gemma 4 12B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning
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 4 12B and Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Function calling before moving production traffic.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning and Gemma 4 12B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Gemma 4 12B adds Vision, Multimodal, and Function calling in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-06-03 | 2025-12-01 |
| Context window | 256k | 128k |
| Parameters | 11.9B | 3.8B |
| Architecture | encoder free unified multimodal | decoder only |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-01 | 2025-02 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Gemma 4 12B | Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | - |
| Output price | - | - |
| Providers |
Pricing not yet sourced for either model.
Capabilities
| Capability | Gemma 4 12B | Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | No |
| Multimodal | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Function calling | Yes | No |
| Tool use | Yes | 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 rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Gemma 4 12B, multimodal input: Gemma 4 12B, function calling: Gemma 4 12B, and tool use: Gemma 4 12B. Both models share reasoning mode, 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 4 12B has no token price sourced yet and Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 2 tracked routes versus 1. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Gemma 4 12B when long-context analysis, larger context windows, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning when provider fit 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
Which has a larger context window, Gemma 4 12B or Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning?
Gemma 4 12B supports 256k tokens, while Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning supports 128k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Is Gemma 4 12B or Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning open source?
Gemma 4 12B is listed under Apache 2.0. Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning is listed under Proprietary. 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 4 12B or Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning?
Gemma 4 12B 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 4 12B or Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning?
Gemma 4 12B 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.
Which is better for reasoning mode, Gemma 4 12B or Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning?
Both Gemma 4 12B and Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning expose reasoning mode. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Where can I run Gemma 4 12B and Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning?
Gemma 4 12B is available on Hugging Face Inference Endpoints and Kaggle Models. Phi-4 Mini Flash Reasoning is available on NVIDIA NIM. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-03. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.