Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B vs Qianfan-OCR-Fast
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B (2026) and Qianfan-OCR-Fast (2026) are compact production models from Microsoft Research and Baidu AI. Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B ships a not-yet-sourced context window, while Qianfan-OCR-Fast ships a 66k-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
Qianfan-OCR-Fast is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B | Qianfan-OCR-Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | multimodal apps | multimodal apps |
| Decision fit | Vision | Vision |
| Context window | — | 66k |
| Cheapest output | - | $2.81/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 0 tracked | 1 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Local decision data tags Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B for Vision.
- Qianfan-OCR-Fast has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Qianfan-OCR-Fast has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Local decision data tags Qianfan-OCR-Fast for Vision.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Qianfan-OCR-Fast
$1,247
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Qianfan-OCR-Fast; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Qianfan-OCR-Fast and Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-03-12 | 2026-04-20 |
| Context window | — | 66k |
| Parameters | 15B | — |
| Architecture | - | decoder only |
| License | MIT | Proprietary |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-03 | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B | Qianfan-OCR-Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | $0.68/1M tokens |
| Output price | - | $2.81/1M tokens |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Capability | Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B | Qianfan-OCR-Fast |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | Yes |
| Multimodal | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | No | 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 is close: both models cover vision and 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: Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B has no token price sourced yet and Qianfan-OCR-Fast has $0.68/1M input tokens. Provider availability is 0 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 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation are central to the workload. Choose Qianfan-OCR-Fast when vision-heavy evaluation and broader provider choice 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 Reasoning Vision 15B or Qianfan-OCR-Fast open source?
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is listed under MIT. Qianfan-OCR-Fast is listed under Proprietary. 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-4 Reasoning Vision 15B or Qianfan-OCR-Fast?
Both Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Qianfan-OCR-Fast expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for multimodal input, Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B or Qianfan-OCR-Fast?
Both Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Qianfan-OCR-Fast expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
Where can I run Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B and Qianfan-OCR-Fast?
Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B is available on the tracked providers still being sourced. Qianfan-OCR-Fast is available on OpenRouter. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
When should I pick Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B over Qianfan-OCR-Fast?
Qianfan-OCR-Fast is safer overall; choose Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B when vision-heavy evaluation matters. If your workload also depends on vision-heavy evaluation, start with Phi-4 Reasoning Vision 15B; if it depends on vision-heavy evaluation, run the same evaluation with Qianfan-OCR-Fast.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-06-04. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.