LLM Reference

Phi-3 Mini 4k vs Qwen3.5-4B

Phi-3 Mini 4k (2024) and Qwen3.5-4B (2026) are compact production models from Microsoft Research and Alibaba. Phi-3 Mini 4k ships a 4k-token context window, while Qwen3.5-4B ships a 262k-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Qwen3.5-4B leads by 33.4 pts. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.

Qwen3.5-4B fits 66x more tokens; pick it for long-context work and Phi-3 Mini 4k for tighter calls.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalPhi-3 Mini 4kQwen3.5-4B
Best forprovider-routed productionmultimodal apps
Decision fitCoding and ClassificationCoding, Agents, and Long context
Context window4k262k
Cheapest output$0.25/1M tokens-
Provider routes4 tracked0 tracked
Shared benchmarks2 rowsMMLU PRO leader

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Phi-3 Mini 4k when...
  • 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 Qwen3.5-4B when...
  • Qwen3.5-4B holds a shared-benchmark lead on MMLU PRO, ahead by 33.4 points.
  • Qwen3.5-4B has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
  • Qwen3.5-4B uniquely exposes Vision and Multimodal in local model data.
  • Local decision data tags Qwen3.5-4B for Coding, Agents, and Long context.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.

Phi-3 Mini 4k

$103

Cheapest tracked route/tier: Replicate API

Qwen3.5-4B

Unavailable

No complete token price in local provider data

Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.

Switch friction

Phi-3 Mini 4k -> Qwen3.5-4B
  • No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Phi-3 Mini 4k and Qwen3.5-4B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
  • Qwen3.5-4B adds Vision and Multimodal in local capability data.
Qwen3.5-4B -> Phi-3 Mini 4k
  • No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Qwen3.5-4B and Phi-3 Mini 4k; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
  • Check replacement coverage for Vision and Multimodal before moving production traffic.

Specs

Specification
Released2024-04-232026-03-02
Context window4k262k
Parameters3.8B4B
Architecturedecoder only-
LicenseMIT(OSI)Apache 2.0(OSI)
OpennessOpen sourceOpen source
Commercial useCommercial use allowedCommercial use allowed
Knowledge cutoff2023-10-

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributePhi-3 Mini 4kQwen3.5-4B
Input price$0.05/1M tokens-
Output price$0.25/1M tokens-
Providers-

Capabilities

CapabilityPhi-3 Mini 4kQwen3.5-4B
VisionNoYes
MultimodalNoYes
ReasoningNoNo
Function callingNoNo
Tool useNoNo
Structured outputsNoNo
Code executionNoNo
IDE integrationNoNo
Computer useNoNo
Parallel agentsNoNo

Benchmarks

BenchmarkPhi-3 Mini 4kQwen3.5-4B
MMLU PRO45.779.1
Google-Proof Q&A40.976.2

Deep dive

On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Phi-3 Mini 4k at 45.7 and Qwen3.5-4B at 79.1, with Qwen3.5-4B ahead by 33.4 points; Google-Proof Q&A has Phi-3 Mini 4k at 40.9 and Qwen3.5-4B at 76.2, with Qwen3.5-4B ahead by 35.3 points. The largest visible gap is 35.3 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 differs most on vision: Qwen3.5-4B and multimodal input: Qwen3.5-4B. 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: Phi-3 Mini 4k has $0.05/1M input tokens and Qwen3.5-4B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 4 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.

Choose Phi-3 Mini 4k when provider fit and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3.5-4B when long-context analysis and larger context windows are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.

FAQ

Which has a larger context window, Phi-3 Mini 4k or Qwen3.5-4B?

Qwen3.5-4B supports 262k tokens, while Phi-3 Mini 4k supports 4k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.

Is Phi-3 Mini 4k or Qwen3.5-4B open source?

Phi-3 Mini 4k is listed under MIT. Qwen3.5-4B is listed under Apache 2.0. 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, Phi-3 Mini 4k or Qwen3.5-4B?

Qwen3.5-4B 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. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.

Which is better for multimodal input, Phi-3 Mini 4k or Qwen3.5-4B?

Qwen3.5-4B 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 Phi-3 Mini 4k and Qwen3.5-4B?

Phi-3 Mini 4k is available on Microsoft Foundry, NVIDIA NIM, Baseten API, and Replicate API. Qwen3.5-4B 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 Phi-3 Mini 4k over Qwen3.5-4B?

Qwen3.5-4B fits 66x more tokens; pick it for long-context work and Phi-3 Mini 4k for tighter calls. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Phi-3 Mini 4k; if it depends on long-context analysis, run the same evaluation with Qwen3.5-4B.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-05-19. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.