Phi-4 Mini vs ShieldGemma 9B
Phi-4 Mini (2024) and ShieldGemma 9B (2024) are compact production models from Microsoft Research and Google DeepMind. Phi-4 Mini ships a not-yet-sourced context window, while ShieldGemma 9B ships a 8K-token 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. The goal is to make the tradeoff clear before deeper testing.
Phi-4 Mini is safer overall; choose ShieldGemma 9B when provider fit matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Phi-4 Mini | ShieldGemma 9B |
|---|---|---|
| Decision fit | Classification | Classification |
| Context window | — | 8K |
| Cheapest output | $0.15/1M tokens | - |
| Provider routes | 3 tracked | 1 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Phi-4 Mini has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Local decision data tags Phi-4 Mini for Classification.
- ShieldGemma 9B has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Local decision data tags ShieldGemma 9B for Classification.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.
Phi-4 Mini
$77.50
Cheapest tracked route: Novita AI
ShieldGemma 9B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2024-12-13 | 2024-07-01 |
| Context window | — | 8K |
| Parameters | 3.8B | 9B |
| Architecture | - | decoder only |
| License | Microsoft Research | 1 |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Phi-4 Mini | ShieldGemma 9B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.05/1M tokens | - |
| Output price | $0.15/1M tokens | - |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Phi-4 Mini | ShieldGemma 9B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | No |
| Multimodal | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | No | No |
| Tool use | No | No |
| Structured outputs | No | No |
| Code execution | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
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.
Pricing coverage is uneven: Phi-4 Mini has $0.05/1M input tokens and ShieldGemma 9B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 3 tracked routes versus 1. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Phi-4 Mini when provider fit and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose ShieldGemma 9B 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 Phi-4 Mini or ShieldGemma 9B open source?
Phi-4 Mini is listed under Microsoft Research. ShieldGemma 9B is listed under 1. 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-4 Mini and ShieldGemma 9B?
Phi-4 Mini is available on Fireworks AI, NVIDIA NIM, and Novita AI. ShieldGemma 9B is available on NVIDIA NIM. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
When should I pick Phi-4 Mini over ShieldGemma 9B?
Phi-4 Mini is safer overall; choose ShieldGemma 9B when provider fit matters. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Phi-4 Mini; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with ShieldGemma 9B.
What is the main difference between Phi-4 Mini and ShieldGemma 9B?
Phi-4 Mini and ShieldGemma 9B 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
Last reviewed: 2026-05-11. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.