Compare

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct vs Phi 4 Reasoning

Put two to four models side by side on the fields that decide a deployment: context, price, region, license, languages, hosting, and what is verified.

Phi-4-multimodal-instructPhi 4 Reasoning
Provider MicrosoftMicrosoft
Parameters 5.57B14.7B
Context window 131kNot verified: the provider has not documented this claim.
License mitmit
Modalities text, vision, audiotext
Release date 24 Feb 202509 Apr 2025
Languages Strong: en, de, fr, es, it, pt
Adequate: nl, pl, sv, da, fi, cs, ru, uk, ar, zh, ja, ko, hi, tr
Strong: en
Adequate: phi, nlp
Open weights yesyes
Tasks Vision, Summarisation, Multilingual support, Low costReasoning, Coding

Where two models differ, this table shows the difference and stops. LLM EU publishes no winner badge without a documented score for that task, and a missing figure stays missing instead of becoming a zero.

When to use it

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Strengths

  • text, image and speech input at 5.6B parameters
  • 128K-token context for document batches
  • MIT licence
  • 23 declared languages including most large EU languages

Limits

  • modality-specific quality is below dedicated single-modality models
  • English-centric training data
  • no evaluation has been run by LLM EU

Tasks

Vision, Summarisation, Multilingual support, Low cost

Phi 4 Reasoning

Strengths

  • open weights are published on Hugging Face and can be downloaded without a vendor agreement
  • mit licence, so commercial self-hosting is permitted without a separate agreement
  • the model page lists en
  • instruction-tuned checkpoint with a chat template in the repository

Limits

  • catalogue only — LLM EU does not run this model, and nothing on this card implies an LLM EU endpoint
  • no evaluation has been run by LLM EU
  • the published configuration records no context window, so the card carries none
  • at 14.7B parameters, self-hosting needs a single accelerator with enough memory for the weights

Tasks

Reasoning, Coding

Tasks: Not verified: the provider has not documented this claim.

Compare models

Compare models →