Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 vs Phi 4

Updated October 21, 2026. 5 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Google
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
5
Phi 4Microsoft
Coding
No data
Overall
5.9
Output $/M
$0.14
0
vs boards won of 5 shared

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 has the edge where the context window is larger, 1.05M against 16K tokens.

Shared results
5
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 only
9
Phi 4 only
40
Like-for-like categories
3 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 not benchmarked, Phi 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 54.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run): Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 77.8% against Phi 4 23.1%, 54.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 $10.00 against Phi 4 $0.14 per million output tokens, 71.4x apart.
Context window
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 takes 1.05M tokens, Phi 4 16K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05BarsPhi 4Ties
Coding10
Reasoning30
Knowledge10
All shared boards50
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
Aider polyglot83.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)79.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)77.8%23.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.8%Only Phi 4 measured
GSO-Bench3.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1231Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1228Only Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured5.9Only Phi 4 measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured130.5Only Phi 4 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured0.0%Only Phi 4 measured
METR time horizons55.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
Remote Labor Index0.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
BALROGNot measured11.6%Only Phi 4 measured
DeepResearch Bench42.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)83.6%57.5%Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)19.9%3.8%Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)84.8%56.1%Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05
SimpleBench62.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
VPCT46.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1220Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1203Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1230Only Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured18.0Only Phi 4 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured18.0%Only Phi 4 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured13.8%Only Phi 4 measured
MATH level 5Not measured64.9%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1246Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1254Only Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.8%71.4%Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05
MMLUNot measured84.8%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1206Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1202Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1241Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1199Only Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
IFBenchNot measured23.5%Only Phi 4 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured0.0%Only Phi 4 measured
Fiction.LiveBench91.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured62.6%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1217Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1201Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1181Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1231Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1197Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1212Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1222Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1158Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1151Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1224Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1234Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1209Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1206Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1217Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1198Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1162Only Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Phi 4Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05$0.0063Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0001Fits in one request

Phi 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05$0.092Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0039Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05$0.350Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.015Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 and Phi 4
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Microsoft Phi 4
MakerGoogleMicrosoft
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 5, 2025January 10, 2025
Context window1.05M16K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.07
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.14
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 better than Phi 4 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 has the edge where the context window is larger, 1.05M against 16K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or Phi 4?

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Phi 4 costs $0.07 and $0.14. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 or Phi 4?

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05, with 1.05M tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05 vs Phi 4 comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Phi 4's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next