The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Gemini 2.0 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 16.7 to 2.0.

Google · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 2.0 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 16.7 to 2.0, ranking #205 overall.

In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Gemini 2.0 Flash wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 2.0 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 16.7 and ranks #205 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 3 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Dec 2024

Choose Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 2.0 Flash
Google
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
16.7
#205
2.0
#302
Reasoning
16.1
#205
1.5
#296
Coding
1.8
#216
-3.8
#240
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
3 of 3
0 of 3
Input price
$0.10 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.40 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Gemini 2.0 Flash
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Math
23.6#122
4.7#273
Long context
11.4#62
11.6#60
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Gemini 2.0 Flash · 31 for Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

3 shared

Gemini 2.0 Flash outperforms in 3 benchmarks (GPQA, MATH, MMLU-Pro), while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Gemini 2.0 Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Gemini 2.0 Flash specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Gemini 2.0 Flash specifies output context (8,192 tokens).

Google
Gemini 2.0 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output8,192 tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemini 2.0 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct does not.

Gemini 2.0 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 2.0 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct uses MIT.

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

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 2.0 Flash was released on 2024-12-01, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Gemini 2.0 Flash is 3 months newer than Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Dec 1, 2024

1.8 years ago

3mo newer
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

2.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 2.0 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-08-01, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 2.0 Flash's training data extends to 2024-08-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct's cutoff date.

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Aug 2024

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 2.0 Flash and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 2.0 Flash
✓ Preferred
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Which is better, Gemini 2.0 Flash or Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 16.7 to 2.0. Gemini 2.0 Flash is made by Google and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 2.0 Flash compare to Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct in benchmarks?

Gemini 2.0 Flash scores Natural2Code: 92.9%, MATH: 89.7%, FACTS Grounding: 83.6%, MMLU-Pro: 76.4%, EgoSchema: 71.5%. Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct scores ARC-C: 91.0%, OpenBookQA: 89.6%, GSM8k: 88.7%, PIQA: 88.6%, RULER: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 2.0 Flash and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct 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 Gemini 2.0 Flash and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (16.7 vs 2.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 2.0 Flash and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Gemini 2.0 Flash is developed by Google and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons