Gemma 2 9B vs Phi-4
Architecture Comparison
SpecGemma 2 9BPhi-4
TypeDENSEDENSE
Total Parameters9.2B14.7B
Active Parameters9.2B14.7B
Layers4240
Hidden Dimension3,5845,120
Attention Heads1640
KV Heads810
Context Length8,19216,384
Precision (default)BF16BF16
Memory Requirements
PrecisionGemma 2 9BPhi-4
BF16 Weights18.4 GB29.4 GB
FP8 Weights9.2 GB14.7 GB
INT4 Weights4.6 GB7.3 GB
KV-Cache / Token344064 B204800 B
Activation Estimate1.00 GB1.50 GB
Minimum GPUs Needed (BF16)
H100 SXM1 GPU1 GPU
L40S1 GPU1 GPU
Quality Benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 9BPhi-4
Overall6883
MMLU71.384.8
HumanEval40.067.0
GSM8K76.093.0
MT-Bench78.085.0
Gemma 2 9B
MMLU
71.3
HumanEval
40.0
GSM8K
76.0
MT-Bench
78.0
Phi-4
MMLU
84.8
HumanEval
67.0
GSM8K
93.0
MT-Bench
85.0
Capabilities
FeatureGemma 2 9BPhi-4
Tool Use✗ No✓ Yes
Vision✗ No✗ No
Code✓ Yes✓ Yes
Math✓ Yes✓ Yes
Reasoning✗ No✓ Yes
Multilingual✓ Yes✓ Yes
Structured Output✓ Yes✓ Yes
API Pricing Comparison
Cheapest Output (Gemma 2 9B)
$0.10/M
Input: $0.10/M
Cheapest Output (Phi-4)
$0.14/M
Input: $0.07/M
| Provider | Gemma 2 9B In $/M | Out $/M | Phi-4 In $/M | Out $/M |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| deepinfra | $0.10 | $0.10 | — | — |
| azure | — | — | $0.07 | $0.14 |
| together | $0.20 | $0.20 | $0.20 | $0.20 |
Recommendation Summary
- ‣Phi-4 scores higher on overall quality (83 vs 68).
- ‣Gemma 2 9B is cheaper per output token ($0.10/M vs $0.14/M).
- ‣Gemma 2 9B has a smaller memory footprint (18.4 GB vs 29.4 GB BF16), making it easier to deploy on fewer GPUs.
- ‣Phi-4 supports a longer context window (16,384 vs 8,192 tokens).
- ‣Phi-4 is stronger at code generation (HumanEval: 67.0 vs 40.0).
- ‣Phi-4 is better at math reasoning (GSM8K: 93.0 vs 76.0).