Mistral Large 2 vs Phi-4
Architecture Comparison
SpecMistral Large 2Phi-4
TypeDENSEDENSE
Total Parameters123B14.7B
Active Parameters123B14.7B
Layers8840
Hidden Dimension12,2885,120
Attention Heads9640
KV Heads810
Context Length131,07216,384
Precision (default)BF16BF16
Memory Requirements
PrecisionMistral Large 2Phi-4
BF16 Weights246.0 GB29.4 GB
FP8 Weights123.0 GB14.7 GB
INT4 Weights61.5 GB7.3 GB
KV-Cache / Token360448 B204800 B
Activation Estimate3.50 GB1.50 GB
Minimum GPUs Needed (BF16)
H100 SXM4 GPUs1 GPU
L40S7 GPUs1 GPU
Quality Benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Large 2Phi-4
Overall8283
MMLU84.084.8
HumanEval53.067.0
GSM8K91.293.0
MT-Bench84.085.0
Mistral Large 2
MMLU
84.0
HumanEval
53.0
GSM8K
91.2
MT-Bench
84.0
Phi-4
MMLU
84.8
HumanEval
67.0
GSM8K
93.0
MT-Bench
85.0
Capabilities
FeatureMistral Large 2Phi-4
Tool Use✓ Yes✓ 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 (Mistral Large 2)
$2.50/M
Input: $2.50/M
Cheapest Output (Phi-4)
$0.14/M
Input: $0.07/M
| Provider | Mistral Large 2 In $/M | Out $/M | Phi-4 In $/M | Out $/M |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| azure | — | — | $0.07 | $0.14 |
| together | $2.50 | $2.50 | $0.20 | $0.20 |
| mistral | $2.00 | $6.00 | — | — |
Recommendation Summary
- ‣Phi-4 scores higher on overall quality (83 vs 82).
- ‣Phi-4 is cheaper per output token ($0.14/M vs $2.50/M).
- ‣Phi-4 has a smaller memory footprint (29.4 GB vs 246.0 GB BF16), making it easier to deploy on fewer GPUs.
- ‣Mistral Large 2 supports a longer context window (131,072 vs 16,384 tokens).
- ‣Phi-4 is stronger at code generation (HumanEval: 67.0 vs 53.0).
- ‣Phi-4 is better at math reasoning (GSM8K: 93.0 vs 91.2).