Compare/Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct vs Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)

Phi-4 Multimodal InstructvsGemini 3.5 Flash (high)

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

Microsoft

Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct

Input
$0/M
Output
$0/M
Speed
17 tok/s
TTFT
0.88s
Google

Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)

Input
$1.5/M
Output
$9/M
Speed
171 tok/s
TTFT
27.29s

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct
Faster (tok/s)
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
Lower Latency
Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct
Benchmarks (0-2)
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)

Pricing Comparison

MetricPhi-4 Multimodal InstructGemini 3.5 Flash (high)
Input ($/M tokens)$0$1.5
Output ($/M tokens)$0$9
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct$0.00
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)$2.40

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct
17 tok/s
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
171 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct
0.88s
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
27.29s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.

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 Multimodal Instruct is strongest on Intelligence Index (4.2). Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) leads on Coding Index (70.1), Intelligence Index (52.0).

Speed. On throughput, Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) generates tokens at 171 tok/s versus 17 tok/s — about 90% faster. On time-to-first-token, Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct responds in 880ms vs 27290ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.

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

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct costs $0.00 ($0/year); Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) costs $180.00 ($2160/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct ≈ $0.00/run, Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) ≈ $25.50/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct ≈ $0/run, Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) ≈ $1200/run. Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

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

  • On throughput, Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) is 9.76× faster (171 tok/s vs 17 tok/s). For streaming chat or real-time agents this alone often flips the recommendation.
  • Time-to-first-token differs by 31.0× — Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct responds in 880ms vs 27290ms. For interactive chat UIs this can matter more than raw benchmark wins.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
4.252.0
Coding Index
70.1
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct0 wins
2 winsGemini 3.5 Flash (high)

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct or Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)?

Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.00/M tokens vs $3.38/M for Gemini 3.5 Flash (high).

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) generates tokens faster at 171 tok/s vs 17 tok/s. Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct also has lower time-to-first-token (0.88s vs 27.29s).

When should I use Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct vs Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)?

Choose based on your priorities: Phi-4 Multimodal Instruct for lower cost, Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) for stronger benchmark performance, and Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.