Side-by-side benchmark comparison across knowledge, coding, math, and reasoning.
Phi-4 has the cleaner overall profile here, landing at 39 versus 37. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Phi-4's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 82.6 against 18.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HumanEval, 82.6 to 26.
DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Phi-4 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) gives you the larger context window at 128K, compared with 16K for Phi-4.
Pick Phi-4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning) only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 128K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Phi-4
70.5
DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)
31.7
Phi-4
82.6
DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)
18.7
Phi-4
80.6
DeepSeek V3.1 (Reasoning)
64
Phi-4 is ahead overall, 39 to 37. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HumanEval, where the scores are 82.6 and 26.
Phi-4 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.5 versus 31.7. Inside this category, MMLU is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Phi-4 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 82.6 versus 18.7. Inside this category, HumanEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Phi-4 has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.6 versus 64. Inside this category, MGSM is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.