Phi-4 vs Mistral Large 2
Architecture Comparison
SpecPhi-4Mistral Large 2
TypeDENSEDENSE
Total Parameters14.7B123B
Active Parameters14.7B123B
Layers4088
Hidden Dimension5,12012,288
Attention Heads4096
KV Heads108
Context Length16,384131,072
Precision (default)BF16BF16
Memory Requirements
PrecisionPhi-4Mistral Large 2
BF16 Weights29.4 GB246.0 GB
FP8 Weights14.7 GB123.0 GB
INT4 Weights7.3 GB61.5 GB
KV-Cache / Token204800 B360448 B
Activation Estimate1.50 GB3.50 GB
Minimum GPUs Needed (BF16)
H100 SXM1 GPU4 GPUs
L40S1 GPU7 GPUs
Quality Benchmarks
BenchmarkPhi-4Mistral Large 2
Overall8382
MMLU84.884.0
HumanEval67.053.0
GSM8K93.091.2
MT-Bench85.084.0
Phi-4
MMLU
84.8
HumanEval
67.0
GSM8K
93.0
MT-Bench
85.0
Mistral Large 2
MMLU
84.0
HumanEval
53.0
GSM8K
91.2
MT-Bench
84.0
Capabilities
FeaturePhi-4Mistral Large 2
Tool Use✓ Yes✓ Yes
Vision✗ No✗ No
Code✓ Yes✓ Yes
Math✓ Yes✓ Yes
Reasoning✓ Yes✗ No
Multilingual✓ Yes✓ Yes
Structured Output✓ Yes✓ Yes
API Pricing Comparison
Cheapest Output (Phi-4)
$0.14/M
Input: $0.07/M
Cheapest Output (Mistral Large 2)
$2.50/M
Input: $2.50/M
| Provider | Phi-4 In $/M | Out $/M | Mistral Large 2 In $/M | Out $/M |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| azure | $0.07 | $0.14 | — | — |
| together | $0.20 | $0.20 | $2.50 | $2.50 |
| 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).