LLM ReferenceLLM Reference

Phi-3 Mini 4k vs Phi-4 Mini

Phi-3 Mini 4k (2024) and Phi-4 Mini (2024) are compact production models from Microsoft Research. Phi-3 Mini 4k ships a 4K-token context window, while Phi-4 Mini ships a not-yet-sourced context window. On MMLU PRO, Phi-4 Mini leads by 7.1 pts. On pricing, Phi-3 Mini 4k costs $0.05/1M input tokens versus $0.05/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.

Pick Phi-4 Mini for general evaluation; Phi-3 Mini 4k is better when provider fit matters more.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalPhi-3 Mini 4kPhi-4 Mini
Decision fitCoding and ClassificationClassification
Context window4K
Cheapest output$0.25/1M tokens$0.15/1M tokens
Provider routes4 tracked3 tracked
Shared benchmarks3 rowsMMLU PRO leader

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Phi-3 Mini 4k when...
  • Phi-3 Mini 4k leads the largest shared benchmark signal on Google-Proof Q&A by 15.7 points.
  • Phi-3 Mini 4k has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
  • Phi-3 Mini 4k has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
  • Local decision data tags Phi-3 Mini 4k for Coding and Classification.
Choose Phi-4 Mini when...
  • Phi-4 Mini leads the largest shared benchmark signal on MMLU PRO by 7.1 points.
  • Phi-4 Mini has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $0.15/1M tokens.
  • Local decision data tags Phi-4 Mini for Classification.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.

Lower estimate Phi-4 Mini

Phi-3 Mini 4k

$103

Cheapest tracked route: Replicate API

Phi-4 Mini

$77.50

Cheapest tracked route: Novita AI

Estimated monthly gap: $25.00. Batch, cache, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.

Switch friction

Phi-3 Mini 4k -> Phi-4 Mini
  • Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Phi-4 Mini is $0.1/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
Phi-4 Mini -> Phi-3 Mini 4k
  • Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Phi-3 Mini 4k is $0.1/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.

Specs

Specification
Released2024-04-232024-12-13
Context window4K
Parameters3.8B3.8B
Architecturedecoder only-
LicenseOpen SourceMicrosoft Research
Knowledge cutoff--

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributePhi-3 Mini 4kPhi-4 Mini
Input price$0.05/1M tokens$0.05/1M tokens
Output price$0.25/1M tokens$0.15/1M tokens
Providers

Capabilities

CapabilityPhi-3 Mini 4kPhi-4 Mini
VisionNoNo
MultimodalNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Function callingNoNo
Tool useNoNo
Structured outputsNoNo
Code executionNoNo

Benchmarks

BenchmarkPhi-3 Mini 4kPhi-4 Mini
MMLU PRO45.752.8
Google-Proof Q&A40.925.2
Massive Multitask Language Understanding68.267.3

Deep dive

On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Phi-3 Mini 4k at 45.7 and Phi-4 Mini at 52.8, with Phi-4 Mini ahead by 7.1 points; Google-Proof Q&A has Phi-3 Mini 4k at 40.9 and Phi-4 Mini at 25.2, with Phi-3 Mini 4k ahead by 15.7 points; Massive Multitask Language Understanding has Phi-3 Mini 4k at 68.2 and Phi-4 Mini at 67.3, with Phi-3 Mini 4k ahead by 0.9 points. The largest visible gap is 15.7 points on Google-Proof Q&A, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.

The capability footprint is close: both models cover the core production surface. 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.

For cost, Phi-3 Mini 4k lists $0.05/1M input and $0.25/1M output tokens, while Phi-4 Mini lists $0.05/1M input and $0.15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Phi-4 Mini lower by about $0.03 per million blended tokens. Availability is 4 providers versus 3, so concentration risk also matters.

Choose Phi-3 Mini 4k when provider fit and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Phi-4 Mini when provider fit are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Phi-3 Mini 4k or Phi-4 Mini?

Phi-3 Mini 4k is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Phi-3 Mini 4k costs $0.05/1M input and $0.25/1M output tokens. Phi-4 Mini costs $0.05/1M input and $0.15/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.

Is Phi-3 Mini 4k or Phi-4 Mini open source?

Phi-3 Mini 4k is listed under Open Source. Phi-4 Mini 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.

Where can I run Phi-3 Mini 4k and Phi-4 Mini?

Phi-3 Mini 4k is available on Microsoft Foundry, NVIDIA NIM, Baseten API, and Replicate API. Phi-4 Mini is available on Fireworks AI, NVIDIA NIM, and Novita AI. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.

When should I pick Phi-3 Mini 4k over Phi-4 Mini?

Pick Phi-4 Mini for general evaluation; Phi-3 Mini 4k is better when provider fit matters more. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Phi-3 Mini 4k; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with Phi-4 Mini.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-05-16. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.