Model Comparison

Claude 3 Opus vs Phi 4 Reasoning

Phi 4 Reasoning significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Claude 3 Opus outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Phi 4 Reasoning is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU-Pro).

Phi 4 Reasoning significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon May 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3 Opus specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3 Opus specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Microsoft
Phi 4 Reasoning
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon May 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3 Opus supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi 4 Reasoning does not.

Claude 3 Opus can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3 Opus

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi 4 Reasoning

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3 Opus is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi 4 Reasoning uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3 Opus

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi 4 Reasoning

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3 Opus was released on 2024-02-29, while Phi 4 Reasoning was released on 2025-04-30.

Phi 4 Reasoning is 14 months newer than Claude 3 Opus.

Claude 3 Opus

Feb 29, 2024

2.2 years ago

Phi 4 Reasoning

Apr 30, 2025

1.0 years ago

1.2yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Phi 4 Reasoning has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-03-01, while Claude 3 Opus's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Phi 4 Reasoning's training data extends to 2025-03-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude 3 Opus's cutoff date.

Claude 3 Opus

—

Phi 4 Reasoning

Mar 2025

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Microsoft
Has open weights
Higher GPQA score (65.8% vs 50.4%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (74.3% vs 68.5%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3 Opus
Microsoft
Phi 4 Reasoning

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3 Opus vs Phi 4 Reasoning.

Which is better, Claude 3 Opus or Phi 4 Reasoning?

Phi 4 Reasoning significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3 Opus is made by Anthropic and Phi 4 Reasoning is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude 3 Opus compare to Phi 4 Reasoning in benchmarks?

Claude 3 Opus scores ARC-C: 96.4%, HellaSwag: 95.4%, GSM8k: 95.0%, MGSM: 90.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 86.8%. Phi 4 Reasoning scores FlenQA: 97.7%, HumanEval+: 92.9%, IFEval: 83.4%, OmniMath: 76.6%, AIME 2024: 75.3%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3 Opus and Phi 4 Reasoning?

Claude 3 Opus supports 200K tokens and Phi 4 Reasoning supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3 Opus and Phi 4 Reasoning?

Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3 Opus and Phi 4 Reasoning?

Claude 3 Opus is developed by Anthropic and Phi 4 Reasoning is developed by Microsoft.