Model Comparison

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instructWhich is better in 2026?

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

Verdict: Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct — which is better?

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview (by Google) and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct (by Microsoft) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview outperforms in 3 benchmarks (HumanEval, MGSM, MMLU-Pro), while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is better at 10 benchmarks (ARC-C, BIG-Bench Hard, BoolQ, GPQA, HellaSwag, MBPP, MMLU, PIQA, Social IQa, Winogrande). Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Choose Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview if…

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

Choose Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 10 of 13 shared benchmarks
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

13 benchmarks

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview outperforms in 3 benchmarks (HumanEval, MGSM, MMLU-Pro), while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is better at 10 benchmarks (ARC-C, BIG-Bench Hard, BoolQ, GPQA, HellaSwag, MBPP, MMLU, PIQA, Social IQa, Winogrande).

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

Wed Jun 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

58.1B diff

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct has 58.1B more parameters than Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview, making it 3041.4% larger.

Google
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
1.9Bparameters
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct
60.0Bparameters
1.9B
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
60.0B
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview supports multimodal inputs, whereas Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct does not.

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is licensed under Gemma, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct uses MIT.

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

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Gemma

Open weights

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview was released on 2025-05-20, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is 9 months newer than Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

May 20, 2025

1.1 years ago

9mo newer
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

Aug 23, 2024

1.8 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct's cutoff date.

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Jun 2024

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Google
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher HumanEval score (75.0% vs 70.7%)
Higher MGSM score (60.7% vs 58.7%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (50.6% vs 45.3%)
Microsoft
Higher ARC-C score (91.0% vs 61.6%)
Higher BIG-Bench Hard score (79.1% vs 52.9%)
Higher BoolQ score (84.6% vs 81.6%)
Higher GPQA score (36.8% vs 23.7%)
Higher HellaSwag score (83.8% vs 78.6%)
Higher MBPP score (80.8% vs 63.6%)
Higher MMLU score (78.9% vs 64.9%)
Higher PIQA score (88.6% vs 81.0%)
Higher Social IQa score (78.0% vs 50.0%)
Higher Winogrande score (81.3% vs 71.7%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Google
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Microsoft
Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview vs Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct.

Which is better, Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview or Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is made by Google and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is made by Microsoft. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview compare to Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct in benchmarks?

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview scores ARC-E: 81.6%, BoolQ: 81.6%, PIQA: 81.0%, HellaSwag: 78.6%, HumanEval: 75.0%. 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 main differences between Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

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

Who makes Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct?

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is developed by Google and Phi-3.5-MoE-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons