Compare/Phi-4 Mini Instruct vs JT-35B-Flash

Phi-4 Mini InstructvsJT-35B-Flash

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Microsoft

Phi-4 Mini Instruct

Input
$0/M
Output
$0/M
Speed
43 tok/s
TTFT
0.83s
China Mobile

JT-35B-Flash

Input
Output
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Phi-4 Mini Instruct
Faster (tok/s)
Phi-4 Mini Instruct
Lower Latency
Phi-4 Mini Instruct
Benchmarks (1-1)
Tie

Pricing Comparison

MetricPhi-4 Mini InstructJT-35B-Flash
Input ($/M tokens)$0
Output ($/M tokens)$0
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Phi-4 Mini Instruct$0.00

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Phi-4 Mini Instruct
43 tok/s
JT-35B-Flash
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Phi-4 Mini Instruct
0.83s
JT-35B-Flash

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Phi-4 Mini Instruct and JT-35B-Flash split the benchmark comparison evenly at 1–1. The tiebreaker here is price, speed, and what you actually run them on.

Pricing. Pricing varies significantly between these models — check the table above for the exact per-token rates. Many production workloads actually surface input-token cost (retrieval-augmented prompts, code-context windows), so factor both directions.

Strengths. Phi-4 Mini Instruct is strongest on Intelligence Index (5.7), Coding Index (3.8). JT-35B-Flash leads on Intelligence Index (29.0).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. Microsoft and China Mobile sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Microsoft tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while China Mobile often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Head-to-head deltas

  • Benchmark wins tie exactly at 1–1. The tiebreaker on raw benchmark parity will be price, speed, or capability coverage.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
5.729.0
Coding Index
3.8
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Phi-4 Mini Instruct1 wins
1 winsJT-35B-Flash

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Phi-4 Mini Instruct or JT-35B-Flash?

Phi-4 Mini Instruct is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.00/M tokens vs $—/M for JT-35B-Flash.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

It's a tie — both models win 1 benchmarks each across 12 evaluated categories. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Phi-4 Mini Instruct generates tokens faster at 43 tok/s vs — tok/s. Phi-4 Mini Instruct also has lower time-to-first-token (0.83s vs —s).

When should I use Phi-4 Mini Instruct vs JT-35B-Flash?

Choose based on your priorities: Phi-4 Mini Instruct for lower cost, both perform similarly on benchmarks, and Phi-4 Mini Instruct for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.