Model Comparison

Phi 4 Mini vs Qwen3 32B

Qwen3 32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Phi 4 Mini outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 32B is better at 1 benchmark (Arena Hard).

Qwen3 32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Apr 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Apr 21 2026 • llm-stats.com
Microsoft
Phi 4 Mini
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 32B
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

29.0B diff

Qwen3 32B has 29.0B more parameters than Phi 4 Mini, making it 754.2% larger.

Microsoft
Phi 4 Mini
3.8Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 32B
32.8Bparameters
3.8B
Phi 4 Mini
32.8B
Qwen3 32B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Qwen3 32B specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Qwen3 32B specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Microsoft
Phi 4 Mini
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 32B
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Apr 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Phi 4 Mini is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3 32B uses Apache 2.0.

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

Phi 4 Mini

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3 32B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Phi 4 Mini was released on 2025-02-01, while Qwen3 32B was released on 2025-04-29.

Qwen3 32B is 3 months newer than Phi 4 Mini.

Phi 4 Mini

Feb 1, 2025

1.2 years ago

Qwen3 32B

Apr 29, 2025

11 months ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Phi 4 Mini has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Qwen3 32B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Phi 4 Mini's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen3 32B's cutoff date.

Phi 4 Mini

Jun 2024

Qwen3 32B

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Microsoft
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3 32B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Larger context window (128,000 tokens)
Higher Arena Hard score (93.8% vs 32.8%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Microsoft
Phi 4 Mini
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 32B

FAQ

Common questions about Phi 4 Mini vs Qwen3 32B

Qwen3 32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Phi 4 Mini is made by Microsoft and Qwen3 32B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Phi 4 Mini scores GSM8k: 88.6%, ARC-C: 83.7%, BoolQ: 81.2%, OpenBookQA: 79.2%, PIQA: 77.6%. Qwen3 32B scores Arena Hard: 93.8%, AIME 2024: 81.4%, LiveBench: 74.9%, MultiLF: 73.0%, AIME 2025: 72.9%.
Phi 4 Mini supports an unknown number of tokens and Qwen3 32B supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Phi 4 Mini is developed by Microsoft and Qwen3 32B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.