Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Phi-4

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.64/100
Margin
30.9pts
← winning
Microsoft
22.69/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.1 #95 (Supported); Phi-4 #192 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V3.1 and Phi-4 share 11 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to DeepSeek V3.1; 0 to Phi-4.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
11
DeepSeek V3.1 only
1
Phi-4 only
0
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for DeepSeek V3.1 and Phi-4 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

DeepSeek V3.1 has the larger context window at 128K, compared with 16K for Phi-4.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V3.1Phi-4Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V3.1$0 input / $0 outputPhi-4$0 input / $0 outputListed prices are equal.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V3.1Not availablePhi-435 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V3.1Not availablePhi-42.02 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V3.1128KPhi-416KDeepSeek V3.1 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Phi-4Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 34.8%0%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Phi-4Result
AA-SciCodeSource 36.7%26.0%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Phi-4Result
AA-LCRSource 45.0%0.0%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.0%Tie
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Phi-4Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 21.1%4.9%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 73.5%57.5%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
AA-HLESource 6.3%4.1%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -41.1%-56.7%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 23.1%13.2%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 83.5%80.5%Phi-4 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Phi-4Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1152Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Phi-4Result
AA-IFBenchSource 37.8%23.5%DeepSeek V3.1 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare DeepSeek V3.1 and Phi-4 on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for DeepSeek V3.1 and Phi-4 today?

DeepSeek V3.1: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Phi-4: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.