The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 3n E2B vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct leads the LLM Stats Score -3.8 to -10.1.

Google · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct leads the overall LLM Stats Score -3.8 to -10.1, ranking #344 overall.

In the 7 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Phi-3.5-mini-instruct wins 6; 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 Gemma 3n E2B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jun 2025

Choose Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

  • overall performance matters — it scores -3.8 and ranks #344 on LLM Stats
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 7 exact shared results
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemma 3n E2B
Google
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-10.1
#364
-3.8
#344
Reasoning
-10.3
#357
-4.7
#340
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 7
6 of 7
Input price
— / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.10 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Gemma 3n E2B
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Math
-6.3#319
-1.5#303
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Gemma 3n E2B · 31 for Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

7 shared

Gemma 3n E2B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (HellaSwag), while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is better at 6 benchmarks (ARC-C, BIG-Bench Hard, BoolQ, PIQA, Social IQa, Winogrande).

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

4.2B diff

Gemma 3n E2B has 4.2B more parameters than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct, making it 110.5% larger.

Google
Gemma 3n E2B
8.0Bparameters
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
3.8Bparameters
8.0B
Gemma 3n E2B
3.8B
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Phi-3.5-mini-instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Phi-3.5-mini-instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Google
Gemma 3n E2B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemma 3n E2B supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi-3.5-mini-instruct does not.

Gemma 3n E2B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 3n E2B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3n E2B is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct uses MIT.

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

Gemma 3n E2B

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3n E2B was released on 2025-06-26, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Gemma 3n E2B is 10 months newer than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct.

Gemma 3n E2B

Jun 26, 2025

1.2 years ago

10mo newer
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

2.0 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E2B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E2B's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Phi-3.5-mini-instruct's cutoff date.

Gemma 3n E2B

Jun 2024

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemma 3n E2B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 3n E2B
✓ Preferred
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3n E2B vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 3n E2B or Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Phi-3.5-mini-instruct leads the LLM Stats Score -3.8 to -10.1. Gemma 3n E2B is made by Google and Phi-3.5-mini-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 Gemma 3n E2B compare to Phi-3.5-mini-instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 3n E2B scores PIQA: 78.9%, BoolQ: 76.4%, ARC-E: 75.8%, HellaSwag: 72.2%, Winogrande: 66.8%. Phi-3.5-mini-instruct scores GSM8k: 86.2%, ARC-C: 84.6%, RULER: 84.1%, PIQA: 81.0%, OpenBookQA: 79.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemma 3n E2B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Gemma 3n E2B supports an unknown number of tokens and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemma 3n E2B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-10.1 vs -3.8), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 3n E2B and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct?

Gemma 3n E2B is developed by Google and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons