LLM ReferenceLLM Reference

Granite Vision 4.1 4B vs Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B

Granite Vision 4.1 4B (2026) and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B (2026) are general-purpose language models from IBM Research and Microsoft Research. Granite Vision 4.1 4B ships a not-yet-sourced context window, while Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B ships a not-yet-sourced context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.

Granite Vision 4.1 4B is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when provider fit matters.

Specs

Specification
Released2026-04-292026-03-12
Context window——
Parameters4B15B
ArchitectureSigLIP2 vision encoder + Window Q-Former projectors + Granite 4.1 3B LLM with LoRA rank 256-
LicenseOpen SourceMicrosoft Research
Knowledge cutoff--

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeGranite Vision 4.1 4BPhi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Input price--
Output price--
Providers--

Pricing not yet sourced for either model.

Capabilities

CapabilityGranite Vision 4.1 4BPhi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
VisionNoNo
MultimodalYesYes
ReasoningNoNo
Function callingNoNo
Tool useNoNo
Structured outputsNoNo
Code executionNoNo

Benchmarks

No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.

Deep dive

The capability footprint is close: both models cover multimodal input. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.

Pricing coverage is uneven: Granite Vision 4.1 4B has no token price sourced yet and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 0 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.

Choose Granite Vision 4.1 4B when provider fit are central to the workload. Choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B 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. For teams standardizing a stack, that distinction is often the difference between a benchmark win and a reliable deployment.

FAQ

Is Granite Vision 4.1 4B or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B open source?

Granite Vision 4.1 4B is listed under Open Source. Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is listed under Microsoft Research. 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 multimodal input, Granite Vision 4.1 4B or Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Both Granite Vision 4.1 4B 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.

When should I pick Granite Vision 4.1 4B over Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Granite Vision 4.1 4B is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when provider fit matters. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Granite Vision 4.1 4B; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B.

What is the main difference between Granite Vision 4.1 4B and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B?

Granite Vision 4.1 4B and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B differ most on context, provider coverage, capabilities, or pricing depending on the data currently sourced. Use the specs table first, then validate the model behavior with your own prompts.

Continue comparing

Model pages
Labs and families
Related comparisons

Last reviewed: 2026-04-29. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.