Command R7B vs Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Phi-4-mini
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 78 to 25 and 25 on our weighted score.
CohereCommand R7B
25/100- ECI—
- Price$0.037 / $0.15
- Context128K
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite
78/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1.05M
MicrosoftPhi-4-mini
25/100- ECI—
- Price$0.075 / $0.30
- Context128K
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is our pick
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against Command R7B (25) and Phi-4-mini (25). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceCommand R7BCommand R7B $0.066 · Phi-4-mini $0.131 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite unpriced
- Longest contextGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGemini 2.0 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Command R7B 128,000 · Phi-4-mini 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.0 Flash-LiteCommand R7B: Text · Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Phi-4-mini: Text
- Self-hostingCommand R7B and Phi-4-miniPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Command R7B | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Phi-4-mini |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 25 | 90 | 25 |
| Context window | 40% | 24 | 61 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 25/100 | 78/100 | 25/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Command R7BCohere | Gemini 2.0 Flash-LiteGoogle | Phi-4-miniMicrosoft |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.037 (best) | — | $0.075 |
| Output | $0.15 (best) | — | $0.30 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.066 (best) | — | $0.131 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Cohere API | — | Official Azure API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 4,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens (best) | 4,096 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | command-r7b-12-2024 | — | phi-4-mini |
| API providers | 5 (best) | — | 1 |
| Released | Dec 2, 2024 | Dec 11, 2024 | Dec 11, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 1, 2024 | Jun 2024 | Oct 2023 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Command R7B$0.675
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite—
- Phi-4-mini$1.35
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Command R7B, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Phi-4-mini?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against Command R7B (25) and Phi-4-mini (25). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Command R7B, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Phi-4-mini?
Command R7B is cheaper at $0.037 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price). Phi-4-mini costs $0.075 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Azure API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.066 per million tokens for Command R7B versus $0.131 for Phi-4-mini (2× as much). Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Command R7B has not been scored yet, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has not been scored yet and Phi-4-mini has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Command R7B, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Phi-4-mini yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 128,000 for Command R7B and 128,000 for Phi-4-mini. Maximum output per response: Command R7B up to 4,000, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite up to 8,192, Phi-4-mini up to 4,096 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Command R7B accepts text; Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Phi-4-mini accepts text. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Command R7B and Phi-4-mini publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite is the newest, released Dec 11, 2024. Phi-4-mini came out Dec 11, 2024; Command R7B came out Dec 2, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Command R7B Jun 1, 2024, Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite Jun 2024, Phi-4-mini Oct 2023.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
