Gemma 4 E4B vs Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Gemma 4 E4B (2026) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B (2026) are compact production models from Google DeepMind and Microsoft Research. Gemma 4 E4B ships a 128k-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.
Gemma 4 E4B is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Gemma 4 E4B | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | multimodal apps and tool-calling agents | multimodal apps |
| Decision fit | RAG, Agents, and Long context | Vision |
| Context window | 128k | — |
| Cheapest output | - | - |
| Provider routes | 1 tracked | 0 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Gemma 4 E4B has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Gemma 4 E4B has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Gemma 4 E4B uniquely exposes Function calling in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Gemma 4 E4B for RAG, Agents, and Long context.
- Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B uniquely exposes Vision 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 4 E4B
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 4 E4B and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Function calling before moving production traffic.
- Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B adds Vision in local capability data.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Gemma 4 E4B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision before moving production traffic.
- Gemma 4 E4B adds Function calling in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-03-31 | 2026-03-12 |
| Context window | 128k | — |
| Parameters | 4B | 15B |
| Architecture | - | - |
| License | Apache 2.0 | MIT |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-01 | 2025-03 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Gemma 4 E4B | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | - |
| Output price | - | - |
| Providers | - |
Pricing not yet sourced for either model.
Capabilities
| Capability | Gemma 4 E4B | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | Yes | 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 rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and function calling: Gemma 4 E4B. Both models share 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: Gemma 4 E4B 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 4 E4B 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. For teams standardizing a stack, that distinction is often the difference between a benchmark win and a reliable deployment.
FAQ
Is Gemma 4 E4B or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B open source?
Gemma 4 E4B is listed under Apache 2.0. 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 4 E4B 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 4 E4B or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Both Gemma 4 E4B 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 function calling, Gemma 4 E4B or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Gemma 4 E4B 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 Gemma 4 E4B and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Gemma 4 E4B is available on GCP Vertex 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.
When should I pick Gemma 4 E4B over Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?
Gemma 4 E4B is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation matters. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Gemma 4 E4B; 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.