Phi 4 vs Hy-MT2-1.8B
Phi 4 costs 1.3x less per output token than Hy-MT2-1.8B ($0.14 vs $0.177 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 5.9
- Output $/M
- $0.14
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.177
Phi 4 or Hy-MT2-1.8B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Phi 4 for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.14 vs $0.177 per million) and a larger context window (16K against 8K tokens).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Phi 4 has results on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and LMArena Text: coding; Hy-MT2-1.8B has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Phi 4 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 5.9.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Phi 4
Phi 4 takes 16K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Hy-MT2-1.8B
Phi 4 $0.0001, Hy-MT2-1.8B $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Phi 4 not benchmarked, Hy-MT2-1.8B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Phi 4 $0.14 against Hy-MT2-1.8B $0.177 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
- Context window
- Phi 4 takes 16K tokens, Hy-MT2-1.8B 8K.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Phi 4 | Hy-MT2-1.8B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.1% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 3.8% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1231 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1228 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Phi 4 | Hy-MT2-1.8B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 5.9 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.5 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Phi 4 | Hy-MT2-1.8B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| BALROG | 11.6% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Phi 4 | Hy-MT2-1.8B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 57.5% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 3.8% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 56.1% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1220 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1203 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1230 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Phi 4 | Hy-MT2-1.8B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 18.0 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 18.0% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 13.8% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| MATH level 5 | 64.9% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1246 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1254 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Phi 4 | Hy-MT2-1.8B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 71.4% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| MMLU | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1206 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1202 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1241 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1199 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards measured
| Benchmark | Phi 4 | Hy-MT2-1.8B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 23.5% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 62.6% | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1217 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1201 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1181 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1231 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1197 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1212 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1222 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1158 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1151 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1224 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1234 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1209 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1206 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1217 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1198 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1162 | Not measured | Only Phi 4 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 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
Hy-MT2-1.8B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Hy-MT2-1.8B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Hy-MT2-1.8B 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.
| Specification | Microsoft Phi 4 | Tencent Hy-MT2-1.8B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Microsoft | Tencent |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | January 10, 2025 | August 20, 2026 |
| Context window | 16K | 8K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.07 | $0.044 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.14 | $0.177 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Phi 4 better than Hy-MT2-1.8B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Phi 4 for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.14 vs $0.177 per million) and a larger context window (16K against 8K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Phi 4 or Hy-MT2-1.8B?
Phi 4 costs $0.07 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; Hy-MT2-1.8B costs $0.044 and $0.177. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Phi 4 or Hy-MT2-1.8B?
Phi 4, with 16K tokens against 8K.
Has any benchmark tested both Phi 4 and Hy-MT2-1.8B?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Phi 4 has results on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and LMArena Text: coding; Hy-MT2-1.8B has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.