Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Phi 4 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

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.

Phi 4Microsoft
Coding
No data
Overall
5.9
Output $/M
$0.14
5
Qwen2.5 7B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
0
vs boards won of 5 shared

Decision reading

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

Phi 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 1.4x less.

Shared results
5
Phi 4 only
40
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct only
2
Like-for-like categories
5 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
Phi 4 not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 20.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run): Phi 4 56.1% against Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 35.5%, 20.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Phi 4 $0.14 against Qwen2.5 7B Instruct $0.20 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
Context window
Phi 4 takes 16K tokens, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 33K.

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
CategoryPhi 4BarsQwen2.5 7B InstructTies
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning10
Math10
Knowledge10
All shared boards50
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)23.1%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: coding1231Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1228Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index5.9Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index130.5118.5Phi 4
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom0.0%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
BALROG11.6%7.8%Phi 4
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)57.5%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)56.1%35.5%Phi 4
LMArena Text: hard prompts1220Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: expert1203Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1230Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Math benchmarks for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
AA Math Index18.0Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)18.0%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
OTIS Mock AIME13.8%2.5%Phi 4
MATH level 564.9%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: math1246Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1254Not measuredOnly 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 Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)71.4%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
MMLU84.8%72.9%Phi 4
LMArena Text: science1206Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1202Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1241Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1199Not measuredOnly 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 Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
IFBench23.5%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)0.0%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
DTBenchNot measured47.7%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured6.4%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)62.6%Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text1217Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1201Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1181Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: English1231Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1197Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1212Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: German1222Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1158Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1151Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: French1224Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1234Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1209Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1206Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1217Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1198Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1162Not measuredOnly Phi 4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkPhi 4Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
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

Phi 4$0.0001Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request

Phi 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Phi 4$0.0039Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.0056Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Phi 4$0.015Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.022Exceeds 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 Phi 4 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
SpecificationMicrosoft Phi 4Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
MakerMicrosoftQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJanuary 10, 2025October 16, 2024
Context window16K33K
Input $/Mtok$0.07$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.14$0.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Phi 4 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Phi 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 1.4x less.

Which is cheaper, Phi 4 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Phi 4 costs $0.07 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs $0.10 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Phi 4 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct, with 33K tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks is the Phi 4 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Phi 4's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next