Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Phi 4

GPT-5.6 Sol leads Phi 4 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 47.0 to 5.9, and Phi 4 costs 142.9x less per output token ($0.14 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 38 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI
Coding
73.5
Overall
74.7
Output $/M
$20.00
38
Phi 4Microsoft
Coding
No data
Overall
24.7
Output $/M
$0.14
0
vs boards won of 38 shared

GPT-5.6 Sol or Phi 4: which to pick

Only GPT-5.6 Sol has a coding score, 73.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; Phi 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Phi 4 for output tokens 142.9x cheaper ($0.14 vs $20.00 per million).

Shared results
38
GPT-5.6 Sol only
101
Phi 4 only
8
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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
GPT-5.6 Sol 73.5 from 6 benchmarks, Phi 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 66.7 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: GPT-5.6 Sol 100.0% against Phi 4 13.8%, 86.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.6 Sol $20.00 against Phi 4 $0.14 per million output tokens, 142.9x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.6 Sol 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
CategoryGPT-5.6 SolBarsPhi 4Ties
Coding30
Intelligence20
Agentic work20
Reasoning60
Math30
Knowledge40
General180
All shared boards380
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
LiveBench coding89.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev1616Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
AA Coding Index77.4Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)82.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)96.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)37.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)80.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Code migration (Vals AI)52.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)1.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
IOI (Vals AI)91.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)85.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)20.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)54.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)76.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.1%Only Phi 4 measured
SciCode57.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)65.9%3.8%GPT-5.6 Sol
FrontierCode47.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
FrontierSWE32.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
GSO-Bench76.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
WeirdML88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MirrorCode20.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
ALE-Bench2176.9Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Text: coding14961231GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: software and IT14891228GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena WebDev: React1620Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1618Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1609Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
SciCode10.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
AA Intelligence Index47.05.9GPT-5.6 Sol
Epoch Capabilities Index162.8130.5GPT-5.6 Sol
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
AA Agentic Index50.2Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1245Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1261Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1248Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1239Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1260Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building games1267Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1286Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1241Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LiveBench research54.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LiveBench browser88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LiveBench long agentic48.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
SREBench (Vals AI)30.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)53.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)31.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)48.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)72.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)71.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)20.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Vals Science Index41.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)23.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)8.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
τ²-Bench Telecom85.1%0.0%GPT-5.6 Sol
OSWorld 2.027.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
BALROG60.0%11.6%GPT-5.6 Sol
PostTrainBench36.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,619Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Search1261Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured28.8%Only Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
GPQA Diamond95.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LiveBench reasoning91.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)33.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)94.1%57.5%GPT-5.6 Sol
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)49.5%3.8%GPT-5.6 Sol
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)93.5%56.1%GPT-5.6 Sol
ARC-AGI97.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
ARC-AGI-292.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
SimpleBench64.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Chess puzzles59.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Mystery game puzzles58.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
EBR-bench44.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14831220GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: expert15171203GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14771230GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Vision: diagrams1305Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: homework1305Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark67.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured18.0Only Phi 4 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured18.0%Only Phi 4 measured
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%13.8%GPT-5.6 Sol
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 389.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tier 482.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
ProofBench83.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MATH level 5Not measured64.9%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: math14731246GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: mathematical work14961254GPT-5.6 Sol
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
MMLU Pro89.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)87.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)64.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)67.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MedCode (Vals AI)44.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured71.4%Only Phi 4 measured
SimpleQA Verified69.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MMLUNot measured84.8%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: science14551206GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14311202GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: legal and government14761241GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: business and finance14571199GPT-5.6 Sol
FACTS Benchmark Suite52.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
Design Arena: websites1321Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: UI components1336Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: game dev1368Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: data viz1322Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: 3D1386Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: all code categories1341Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: SVG1316Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1304Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LiveBench design81.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index180
General benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 4Leader
LiveBench data analysis79.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
SAGE (Vals AI)52.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)85.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Vals Multimodal Index72.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
IFBench72.7%23.5%GPT-5.6 Sol
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.0%0.0%GPT-5.6 Sol
DTBench95.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMCA58.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured62.6%Only Phi 4 measured
Surface Evolver Bench93.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Furniture assembly56.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Text14571217GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: instruction following14831201GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: creative writing14491181GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Vision1281Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Text: English14571231GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: non-English14511197GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: Chinese15251212GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: German14761222GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: Japanese14721158GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: Korean14421151GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: French14721224GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: Spanish14431234GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: Russian14711209GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: Polish1459Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14611206GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: longer queries14811217GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: writing and language14621198GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14501162GPT-5.6 Sol
LMArena Vision: English1280Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1313Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1290Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: humor1246Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1283Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
LMArena Document1483Not measuredOnly GPT-5.6 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
BenchmarkGPT-5.6 SolPhi 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

GPT-5.6 Sol$0.014Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0001Fits in one request

Phi 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.6 Sol$0.260Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0039Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.6 Sol$1.00Fits 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 GPT-5.6 Sol and Phi 4
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.6 SolMicrosoft Phi 4
MakerOpenAIMicrosoft
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 9, 2026January 10, 2025
Context window1.05M16K
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.07
Output $/Mtok$20.00$0.14
Coding index73.5Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it60
Cost per solved task$1.20Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.6 Sol better than Phi 4 for coding?

Only GPT-5.6 Sol has a coding score, 73.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; Phi 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Phi 4 for output tokens 142.9x cheaper ($0.14 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Sol or Phi 4?

GPT-5.6 Sol costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 per million output tokens; Phi 4 costs $0.07 and $0.14. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.6 Sol only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.6 Sol or Phi 4?

GPT-5.6 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.6 Sol vs Phi 4 comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.6 Sol's coding index rests on 6 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